Matt Yglesias

24 Responses to “The Difference on Health Care”

1. Chris Conway Says:
   August 19th, 2008 at 9:44 am

   I’d question the “information design” here. It’s very difficult to make a meaningful comparison between the three gray-ish bands. They all kind of look the same.

   It’s also hard to evaluate this without knowing the total cost of each plan, as well as the average individual cost. Could the outcome for McCain’s plan be improved with marginally more spending?

2. right Says:
   August 19th, 2008 at 9:50 am

   Obama’s plan leaves that many uninsured? Maybe Petey was right! [shudder]

3. TW Says:
   August 19th, 2008 at 12:02 pm

   The TPC estimated that Obama’s plan would cost $1.6 trillion over 10 years & reduce the number of uninsured by 50% (34 million people); whereas McCain’s plan would cost $1.3 trillion & reduce the uninsured by 8% (5 million). In terms of cost-effectiveness, it’s no contest.

   TPC’s estimate of the combined impact of each candidate’s tax & health plans couldn’t differ more starkly. Obama’s proposals would cost $1 trillion less than McCain’s, while cutting the number of uninsured by half, significantly increasing after-tax incomes for families in the bottom 60% of incomes, and increasing net taxes only on those earning more than about $600K. In contrast, McCain’s tax plan is much more expensive, barely makes a dent in the number of uninsured, and targets the most generous tax relief on the very highest-income families (more than $2.8 million a year).

   When TPC talks about the cost of these proposals, bear in mind that their baseline estimate has taxes going up significantly from current levels as the Bush tax plans expire. Obama’s plan would hold overall tax rates to roughly their current (and historically low) level, while McCain would reduce them even further.

   Also note that TPC hasn’t estimated either candidate’s climate change proposals. Because Obama wants to auction off carbon emission permits, his plan would raise substantial revenue that could help to offset the costs of his other proposals. McCain seems to favor giving the permits to industry, which would do nothing to reduce the cost of his other proposals while further enriching the richest families.

   I also wish that Obama would push harder for universal coverage (and for greater health care cost containment, for that matter), and that he’d take a tougher line on fiscal responsibility – if only because campaign plans represent the opening bid in a negotiation. If something like Obama’s plan actually came to pass, it would be a phenomenal achievement for progressives.

4. Dilan Esper Says:
   August 19th, 2008 at 4:52 pm

   Obama’s plan leaves that many uninsured? Maybe Petey was right!

   Petey was never wrong about Obama’s plan. What he was wrong about was the Edwards/Clinton alternative. Individual mandates do not magically insure everyone; all they do is criminalize the uninsured. And the public plan in Edwards’ and Clinton’s plan was not going to lead to a single payer, any more than the public student loan plan that was set up to compete with private plans has led us to a single payer system of college financing. Congress ensured the public plan couldn’t effectively compete with campaign contributing private firms, and the same thing would happen with health care.

   In other words, I imagine that Edwards and Clinton would end up with a similar number of uninsured, plus a whole bunch of people buying the absolute minimum health care policy to meet the mandate, and essentially being uninsured as well because their coverage is through an insurer which will deny them if they ever make a serious claim.

5. JonF Says:
   August 19th, 2008 at 8:11 pm

   Why does the graph set seem to show Obama’s plan starting from a different origin than the other two in 2009? The “Public-uninsured” boundary is definitely higher at the beginning and the “employer-non group boundary looks a bit higher up as well.
   Come on, he’s not so good that be can change the past!

6. JonF Says:
   August 19th, 2008 at 8:14 pm

   Re: plus a whole bunch of people buying the absolute minimum health care policy to meet the mandate, and essentially being uninsured as well because their coverage is through an insurer which will deny them if they ever make a serious claim.

   It doesn’t that work that way even now. They can’t deny a claim for something that’s legitimately covered and it’s extremely rare that anyone tries, not counting paperwork snafus which are usually staightened out. Nor can they drop someone willy-nilly– the 1996 HIPAA law prevents this. However, come the next renewal period they can raise the premium sky-high and force poeple out that way.

7. cialis Says:
   March 1st, 2009 at 7:04 pm

   cialis
   Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!

8. viagra Says:
   March 11th, 2009 at 4:55 am

   Great site. Good info

9. xanax Says:
   March 14th, 2009 at 5:37 am

   Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
   xanax

10. tramadol Says:
    March 17th, 2009 at 2:32 am

    Incredible site!
    tramadol

11. buy viagra online Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 10:33 am

    buy viagra online
    Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

12. viagra brand Says:
    April 3rd, 2009 at 4:21 am

    I want to say – thank you for this!
    cheap brand pfizer viagra