As I’m sure you’ve all noticed by now, things aren’t going well for Obamacare. Reality has set in and his media buddies are turning against him. Now they’ve even had to admit that the numbers aren’t going to be good. Ha ha. But do you know what the real problem is? Read on...
Senior Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer said on Sunday that the enrollment numbers for Obamacare “are not going to be what we want them to be.” This sounds a bit like Dr. Daystrom from the Star Trek episode “The Ultimate Computer” telling Kirk that the M1 through the M4 were “not entirely successful,” which was why he created the M5, which promptly went on a massive killing spree.
Anyway, WE knew the numbers were going to stink, it’s good that Team Obama finally realizes this. Interestingly though, Obama keeps trying to blame the website. In fact, Pfeiffer said that poor Obama is “frustrated” by the failure of healthcare.gov.incompetence and they swear they will get this sucker fixed by November so the public can revel in Obama’s glory. Ok, sure.
The thing is, I don’t think the website is the problem. Something is very wrong with Obamacare right now. If you look at the numbers, there should be 9 million uninsurables knocking on their e-door to sign up, but even their visitor numbers (and certainly the small numbers of people who tried to open accounts) suggest that didn’t happen. Why not?
Here’s what I’m thinking. The prices are simply too high. Thinking about the uninsurables, I see them in three groups. The first group are uninsurable because of some potential condition which doesn’t actually affect them yet. Those people have no reason to pay a ton to get insurance they won’t use... they can wait until they get sick. The second group have a condition that has bankrupted them. These people fall into one of two groups. The first group is probably already on Medicaid or disability and thus has no need for Obamacare. The second group is busy racking up the bills, but plans to file bankruptcy to get rid of them. They have no reason to sign up either because, to them, it’s just throwing good money after bad.
That leaves the third group: people who earn enough to cover their medical bills (and thus can’t file for bankruptcy or get Medicaid) but who can’t get insurance. This is the only group who would be interested in Obamacare and I frankly doubt there are many of them. Indeed, someone who is truly uninsurable is likely in the bankruptcy phase already. But let’s consider them for a moment.
In effect, the only uninsurables who will care about Obamacare are people whose bills are high each year, but manageable. Those people will look at Obamacare and ask the following question: will the premiums plus the full amount of the deductible be less than or greater than what I pay each year. As we’re seeing, premiums for families are around $1,200 a month and the deductible is $12,700. So unless their bills are greater than $27,100 a year, they have no reason to sign up either. And $27,100 covers a LOT of medicine, even for someone with an “uninsurable condition.”
What this means is that for even the vast majority of the uninsurables, Obamacare is a bad deal. And if it’s a bad deal for them, then it must be a horrible deal for insurables... especially the young, healthy “who needs insurance?” types.
In effect, Obamacare has priced itself out of the market.
An even worse sign for Obamacare is that Obamacare is suddenly becoming very “uncool.” It’s being mocked by comedians and average people. The actors who endorsed it have gone into hiding. The Democrats are screaming about problems. All that is bad. Indeed, when “the establishment” is mocking something, it becomes nearly impossible to get the sheep faction of the population to adopt it... it goes against the human herd instinct.
But even worse, the MSM is starting to rip it to shreds in a particularly nasty way. Specifically, they are finding the victims of Obamacare and highlighting their plights, typically with mentions that these people “supported Obama” and mentions that “Obama lied” about his promise that they could keep their insurance. Then they cite some massive premium number and tell a horror story about what the cancellation of the person's insurance has done to them. And each of these people is saying they would rather pay the fine. In effect, this is a very unfair story because it takes worst case anecdotal evidence and uses it to project a trend onto the public as a whole. That's logical BS, but since the MSM always does this to the Republicans, it's good to see them do it to their own side for once.
In any event, this adds a nasty touch to the PR which gives people the sense that Obamacare is something that hurts people and isn’t helping anyone (especially as they can’t even find people who are being helped). The message this sends is: avoid this menace, it will only cause you problems.
This is how products fail, when products get an “uncool” reputation as too expensive and “not something you want.” And fixing the website isn’t going to save it. Once the public adopts a particular mindset about something, it doesn’t change. And if the public sees Obamacare as something hurtful they should avoid, then forget this ponzi scheme ever getting off the ground.
Senior Obama advisor Dan Pfeiffer said on Sunday that the enrollment numbers for Obamacare “are not going to be what we want them to be.” This sounds a bit like Dr. Daystrom from the Star Trek episode “The Ultimate Computer” telling Kirk that the M1 through the M4 were “not entirely successful,” which was why he created the M5, which promptly went on a massive killing spree.
Anyway, WE knew the numbers were going to stink, it’s good that Team Obama finally realizes this. Interestingly though, Obama keeps trying to blame the website. In fact, Pfeiffer said that poor Obama is “frustrated” by the failure of healthcare.gov.incompetence and they swear they will get this sucker fixed by November so the public can revel in Obama’s glory. Ok, sure.
The thing is, I don’t think the website is the problem. Something is very wrong with Obamacare right now. If you look at the numbers, there should be 9 million uninsurables knocking on their e-door to sign up, but even their visitor numbers (and certainly the small numbers of people who tried to open accounts) suggest that didn’t happen. Why not?
Here’s what I’m thinking. The prices are simply too high. Thinking about the uninsurables, I see them in three groups. The first group are uninsurable because of some potential condition which doesn’t actually affect them yet. Those people have no reason to pay a ton to get insurance they won’t use... they can wait until they get sick. The second group have a condition that has bankrupted them. These people fall into one of two groups. The first group is probably already on Medicaid or disability and thus has no need for Obamacare. The second group is busy racking up the bills, but plans to file bankruptcy to get rid of them. They have no reason to sign up either because, to them, it’s just throwing good money after bad.
That leaves the third group: people who earn enough to cover their medical bills (and thus can’t file for bankruptcy or get Medicaid) but who can’t get insurance. This is the only group who would be interested in Obamacare and I frankly doubt there are many of them. Indeed, someone who is truly uninsurable is likely in the bankruptcy phase already. But let’s consider them for a moment.
In effect, the only uninsurables who will care about Obamacare are people whose bills are high each year, but manageable. Those people will look at Obamacare and ask the following question: will the premiums plus the full amount of the deductible be less than or greater than what I pay each year. As we’re seeing, premiums for families are around $1,200 a month and the deductible is $12,700. So unless their bills are greater than $27,100 a year, they have no reason to sign up either. And $27,100 covers a LOT of medicine, even for someone with an “uninsurable condition.”
What this means is that for even the vast majority of the uninsurables, Obamacare is a bad deal. And if it’s a bad deal for them, then it must be a horrible deal for insurables... especially the young, healthy “who needs insurance?” types.
In effect, Obamacare has priced itself out of the market.
An even worse sign for Obamacare is that Obamacare is suddenly becoming very “uncool.” It’s being mocked by comedians and average people. The actors who endorsed it have gone into hiding. The Democrats are screaming about problems. All that is bad. Indeed, when “the establishment” is mocking something, it becomes nearly impossible to get the sheep faction of the population to adopt it... it goes against the human herd instinct.
But even worse, the MSM is starting to rip it to shreds in a particularly nasty way. Specifically, they are finding the victims of Obamacare and highlighting their plights, typically with mentions that these people “supported Obama” and mentions that “Obama lied” about his promise that they could keep their insurance. Then they cite some massive premium number and tell a horror story about what the cancellation of the person's insurance has done to them. And each of these people is saying they would rather pay the fine. In effect, this is a very unfair story because it takes worst case anecdotal evidence and uses it to project a trend onto the public as a whole. That's logical BS, but since the MSM always does this to the Republicans, it's good to see them do it to their own side for once.
In any event, this adds a nasty touch to the PR which gives people the sense that Obamacare is something that hurts people and isn’t helping anyone (especially as they can’t even find people who are being helped). The message this sends is: avoid this menace, it will only cause you problems.
This is how products fail, when products get an “uncool” reputation as too expensive and “not something you want.” And fixing the website isn’t going to save it. Once the public adopts a particular mindset about something, it doesn’t change. And if the public sees Obamacare as something hurtful they should avoid, then forget this ponzi scheme ever getting off the ground.
65 comments:
I knew when Jimmy Fallon was mocking it and making jokes about it that it was really having problems.
Kit, Definitely. Once something becomes an object of ridicule, it's hard for anyone to take it seriously. Interestingly, the East Germans knew this and tried to ban humor at one point because it was hurting their regime.
BTW, My favorite East German joke from the time:
A man goes to a car dealer and orders a new car. He's told that he can pick it up five years from today precisely. He says he cannot do that. "Why not?" asks the perplexed car salesman.
"Because the plumber is coming that morning."
Andrew....What's interesting is that the above article distills down to a tee how the media/culture/left has demonized repubs, conservative ideas, etc. You're right, it's great to see them apply it FINALLY to a lib/left/dem action and policy.
We need more!!
Oh....and here's what I think is going to happen:
1) Website won't be fixed anytime soon, much less by 11/30. Dems call for "the repub solution" of delaying the implementation. Repubs agree, once again saving the dems ass.
2) Millions...MILLIONS more people start getting their cancellation/"transition" notices next year that their current healthcare plan is in fact NOT grandfathered and ACA compliant. Dems call for delay/repeal of clause allowing the millions (of potential voters) to "keep" their old plans..."just like the president claimed." Dems dare the repubs to "hurt the middle class." Repubs cave once again saving the dems ass.
3) Insurers start losing mega dollars once they start paying out for all the sick people who have signed up for ACA, and not getting the concurrent healthy young people signing up and offsetting those costs. Dems cry for "bailout" of the insurance companies to keep them afloat and not drop the "sick insured". Repubs cave saving the dems ass.
4) Same scenario as above. Dems cry that "see, insurers are so greedy they won't cover the sick." Dems push for "single-payer" (or some other innocuous sounding term) in order to "save Mary Oberlin, and others like her with cancer who will be losing their coverage because of the rampant greed of the "free market capitalists." Repubs agree saving the Dems ass.
All scenarios where the media will gratefully jump back on board the anti-repub wagon and proclaim "we have to fix the ACA!" but the evil repubs want your children/grandmother/sick people to die!!!
BTW....the above IS NOT tongue-in-cheek.
Andrew,
From TVTropes:
An Arab Oil Sheikh hears that there's an East German car you have to wait twelve years for. He thinks that it must be a very great car and orders one. The East Germans think that it can't hurt to be friendly to a rich sheikh and send him one Trabant immediately. Soon after, the sheikh tells a friend: "These Germans were very nice - they sent me a cardboard model of the car, and guess what? You can even drive it!"
"There was some good news today for embattled Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Obamacare will cover all her injuries after the White House throws her under the bus. She is totally covered." -Jay Leno
How slow is Obamacare's website?
“By the time you sign up for Obamacare, you’re eligible for Medicare.”
LINK
I don't think Obama is doing himself any favors by trying to emphasize the number of people getting cancellations is a tiny minority. That's just not talk befitting of a Democrat. (Any politician, really, but we know the Repubs have problems like that.)
Lest anyone think the media is shifting sides, my guess is that a large number of reporters have seen their rates jacked and are pissed. As for other media types, the entertainer/celebrity employment cycle pretty much ensures that they all buy their own insurance, so as a group they are inordinately affected. Even the successful ones who "can afford it" (and I'm sure they bristle at that assertion) are still surrounded by work-a-day entertainers who are hit hard by Obamacare. Basically, the celebrity perspective on O-care is almost certainly worse than the average view.
That is how Democrats and their Hollywood friends have helped destroy opponents for years. The A.C.A. was always about providing coverage for the "uninsurables" and subsidizing coverage for the poor. The miscalculation was that without the ability to set rates other than mandating that rates for Pre-existing conditions could not exceed 3 times the young immortals, rates would by definition be increased across the board. A lot of Reagan Democrats are realizing premiums were not just going to increase for hated Republican corporates.
However, people still trust Democrats over Republicans to fix things.R's MUST get away from cheerleading implosion of Obamacare and PROPOSE legislation to make healthcare more affordable. Still, If Terry McCauliffe wins, I expect to have to get used to hearing "madame president" and watching news clips of Hillary's neck fat shaking like a bowl full of jelly when she laughs at all of us. It is refreshing to see for once, Obama's bullshit is apparently not flying with anyone beyond an IQ of 2
Obamacare is the political equivalent of a tree falling in the forest. If a Leftist screams "We need healthcare now!," and nobody signs up, was there really a crisis?
Patriot, I think it's fantastic. And I wonder what exactly has happened. Is the MSM upset that Obamacare has been handled so incompetently that they are lashing out? Do they just have nothing to scream about with the Republicans? I'm not sure. Whatever the reason, however, they are using the same illegitimate tactics against the Democrats and I'm loving it.
Patriot, The Democrats can't allow an extension because that causes the insurance death spiral. And the Republicans (except the fringe) haven't done anything to help the Democrats since 2008.
If you want a realistic doomsday scenario, then take this one:
1. Republicans lose the 2014 election after a brutal primary season and because the public despise them.
2. The Dems, controlling the House and Senate and White House, fund Obamacare enough to make it really cheap and tens of million sign up. It becomes permanent.
3. As more people switch onto Obamacare, the government cuts the subsidies, causing insurers to drop out. And you end up with a single payer, brought to you by the Tea Party. Nice work.
Kit, LOL! Nice East German joke! Even better Obamacare jokes! :)
tryanmax, All excellent points. The people who are most angry right now seem to be liberals who bought into all of Obama's lies. They probably feel pretty angry right now.
As for the actors, I would also add that it's dangerous to be attached to a loser and they are probably terrified of finding themselves becoming a late night joke connected to a program that is obviously failing.
On the media, I think there is something else going on too. I think that they have become vicious over the years of smearing Republicans. And not that's become an instinct for them. So once they start looking at Obamacare (and with this otherwise being a dead news cycle), they did what comes naturally -- pushed by the factors you mention plus the sense that Obama has been lying to them all along. And the result is what we see, which I'm sure Obama is in no way used to.
Jed, I agree. I think that the problem on the left right now is that reality (once again) isn't what they thought it was. They thought they could have it all -- force everyone to be covered cheaply and it would just happen. Life doesn't work that way. And now that it's becoming clear that Obamacare has lousy coverage that few can afford and has hurt tens of millions of people, they are getting upset. So like all utopians, they are lashing out.
Totally agree about the Republicans. They need a legitimate plan to offer in exchange or people will just ignore them. Unfortunately, the Republicans seem determined not to offer anything.
Mountain Man, That's the other interesting aspect people need to think about. If no one is signing up, was there ever really a need for such a program?
As for Hollywood types - they are all union members and are covered that way. Their day will come next year some time around Oct 2014 when the union member find out they will lose their platinum plans...that they were promised they could keep.
I am astounded that Obama is actually denying that he ever said anyone could "keep their plan if they liked it." I mean seriously, this proves that he thinks he really IS the smartest person in the room (and on Earth and beyond) that he can deny that after repeating it over and over and over. Not just that he never meant that, but that he never SAID that.
Andrew, you are welcome!
Bev, oh yes, I wasn't thinking about the Film Actors' Guild. That's the right name, isn't it?
Tryanmax - There's SAG (Screen Actors' Guild), AFTRA (television), Actors' Equity (stage) IATSI (stagehands, etc) ILGW (Costumes), Writer's Guilds, the list goes on and on and on. And then there's the Freelancer's Guild that is really p.o.'ed right now because they were pretty much formed for the exclusive reason to provide group insurance for freelance artists, writers, composers etc. not affiliated with any particular unions. Most of the actors' unions have a specific number of weeks a year before one can qualify for coverage, though I am sure that has to have changed in the years after I dropped my union membership.
Bev...To quote from someone who knows BO intimately..... "You know, I actually believe my own bullshit." (c.f. Barack Obama)
He actually told his lackeys at OFA last night that he "never said you could keep your plan if you like it."
According to our Verus Possumus, he said you could keep your plan if it met all the requirements of ACA!
Aaahhh, so sorry. Me so stoopid me thought you said something else. Thank you for edumacating me!
Ric Lowry has a good "speech Obama should have given" article you guys should read. Where he DOESN'T lie to the audience.
And that's how a joke dies.
Sorry...Forgot about netiquette.....
http://nypost.com/2013/11/05/the-obamacare-speech-he-never-gave/
Bev, It's pure arrogance. Obama is used to no one questioning him. What he doesn't understand is that when people are already upset at you, being arrogant only makes them more angry. I suspect that his attempt to deny what is on tape many times will only make the coverage more harsh and will get them looking even deeper.
Bev, With that many unions, it's a wonder they ever finish a film.
Patriot, I'm stunned that Obama really does seem to believe his own lies. That's never a good sign.
What's funny now is the number of leftists who saying that he should have told the truth from the beginning. Yeah, well, that's what you get when you have to lie to get elected.
Here's your link: LINK"
tryanmax, LOL! Sorry.
Thanks for the LINK Andrew!!
I'm really enjoying this... what do the kids say? EPIC FAIL!!!
Patriot, I am too. I love watching the left's dreams shatter upon the rocks of reality and then turn on each other.
According to Gallup, only 39% approve of the job Obama is doing.
LINK
Kit, I approve of their disapproval. :)
:)
More jokes:
The first two are from Fallon:
"But don’t worry, the White House just announced that it’s bringing in the 'best and brightest' tech experts to fix the glitches on the Obamacare website. That's a good plan. But you know what would've been a better plan? Hiring the best and brightest tech experts to make the Obamacare website."
"It’s so bad that today President Obama held a press conference to address the issue, and he was like, 'We'll do our best to fix these technical problems … these technical problems … these technical problems … the teleprompter's busted."
Another from Jay,
"Here's my favorite part: The president said yesterday that if it's taking too long and you're having trouble you can bypass the website and enroll by mail. Only the federal government could come up with a website that's slower than sending something by mail. Isn't that amazing?"
Kit, Those are pretty funny.
And that's how a joke dies.
Tryanmax - I got it, I got it...;-)
But don’t worry, the White House just announced that it’s bringing in the 'best and brightest' tech experts to fix the glitches on the Obamacare website...
Kit - You know the real ending to that joke? The US Government actually hired the same company/people who screwed it up in the first place to "fix it"! That is actually the best example of "government efficiency" -
If you screw it up the first time, we'll give double what we paid you the first time to fix it!
"According to Gallup, only 39% approve of the job Obama is doing. "
Don't get to fixated on that number. In desperation, Obama will drone some random yet dangerous terrorist, close Gitmo, or arrest a group of Tea Partiers and that number will jump right back up.
Bev, True. Not to mention, the Democrats always return home at the end of the day no matter how badly they are abused by their leaders. Obama's minimum true support is 43%.
How sad is that they need to go back to the same people who mis-built it to now not-fix it. Ha ha!
P.S. If anyone hasn't picked up my mother's cookie cookbook and would like a digital copy, it is free today only on Kindle. Please leave reviews! :)
LINK
Bought it.
This is an article in the NYT today. Can someone tell me What it means?
http://nyti.ms/HsqXap
I just read that Cuccinelli is leading 50.8% to 43.7% against McAuliffe! Let's pray that holds.
Bev, On the article, it looks like Obama has tried to exclude Obamacare from laws which prohibit the use of kickbacks in medical care. This would be a sop to industry who use kickbacks to try to win over doctors and patients. It will hurt taxpayers and increase fraud.
That said, I also suspect this is a worthless decision because Obama can't declare what the law is -- that's up the courts and they are going to see this as healthcare.
Gov. Christie has been declared the winner by a large margin.
Bev, That was a given. I'm making a point about that tonight.
In Virginia, Cuccinnelli is down to 47/45 and Northern Virginia hasn't reported yet. I'd say that's the end.
Cucinelli is 47.2%
McAuliffe is 46%
in other words, its too close to call.
NYTimes: LINK
Its now 46.8 Cuccinelli and 46.4% for McAuliffe.
So when is a healthcare law not healthcare even though that's what it is? When Obama says it's not even though he says it is.
I am so confused...
Apparently, the race in Virginia has been declared and McAuliffe is the winner?
Bev, Yeah, they've called it for McAuliffe. The Dems also won the Lt. Governor and may win all five statewide offices -- first time since Nixon.
I see that de Blasio has been declared the winner.
Less than 1% margin.
On the law, this isn't uncommon. The Executive often declares some totally fake interpretation of a law to get around it, but that only lasts until the courts step in.
And in this case, you as a provider don't want to rely on the Executive's interpretation because, if the court goes the other way, you can find yourself in a lot of trouble. "Obama told me I could is no excuse."
Yes, welcome Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio...yippee...
Bev,
You are in my prayers. :/
Kit, Less than 1% so far. It still looks like Northern Virginia hasn't reported. Essentially, Cuccinelli lost rural Virginia by 1%.
Bev, ALL HAIL MAYOR-ELECT THE FUHRER WITH THE BE-FRO'D SON de BLASIO! TREMBLE IN FEAR ALL YEE MORTALS WHO WANT 16 oz DRINKS!
Wow, I just saw an add for MSNBC and it was basically an Obama ad. They showed him giving one of his early speeches to a stadium full of zombies and they talked about how you should watch MSNBC. Amazing. They should need to register as donors.
But hey, we could live in Toronto where the Mayor just admitted he smoked crack only because he was in a drunken stupor. Yeh, that made it better...
Bev, What happens in Toronto when you're in a drunken stupor stays in Toronto.
I think I will use that the next time I get caught smokin' crack. "Hey, I was in a drunken stupor. I don't even remember doin' it! My bad...and it was Bush's fault." There, that should get me out of just about anything, right?
You know, the worst part of a Mayor de Blasio is no more Ray Kelly. :-(
Bev, Rampant crime is a small price to pay for smugness.
Look on the bright side: There was talk of an 11th hour run by Ray Kelly for mayor.
So, who knows? He could run for Mayor in four years against Bill de Blaiso...
Or he could Spitzer his way out of office even sooner the next time he "goes to Toronto."
Post a Comment