Harvard Profs Who Designed ObamaCare Furious It Will Affect Them

[Charlie Prime]

This was too funny.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/06/u...by-harvards-experts-now-roil-its-faculty.html

Harvard professors are angry that they will have to pay more out-of-pocket to support socialized health care.

Members of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the heart of the 378-year-old university, voted overwhelmingly in November to oppose changes that would require them and thousands of other Harvard employees to pay more for health care. The university says the increases are in part a result of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act, which many Harvard professors championed.

Richard F. Thomas, a Harvard professor of classics and one of the world’s leading authorities on Virgil, called the changes “deplorable, deeply regressive, a sign of the corporatization of the university.”

Mary D. Lewis, a professor who specializes in the history of modern France and has led opposition to the benefit changes, said they were tantamount to a pay cut. “Moreover,” she said, “this pay cut will be timed to come at precisely the moment when you are sick, stressed or facing the challenges of being a new parent.”

In addition, some ideas that looked good to academia in theory are now causing consternation. In 2009, while Congress was considering the health care legislation, Dr. Alan M. Garber — then a Stanford professor and now the provost of Harvard — led a group of economists who sent an open letter to Mr. Obama endorsing cost-control features of the bill. They praised the Cadillac tax as a way to rein in health costs and premiums.

 

[SheaOlmsford]

Excuse me but Obamacare is NOT socialized medicine. Obamacare is a free give-away to private insurance companies (part of our corporate capitalist system) with a captive customer base, who can now purchase insurance with pre-existing conditions at a lower price.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

The long and short of it is that what we call Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act, was first devised by the conservative Heritage Foundation in the late 1980s. Even the individual mandate, where people were required to buy health insurance, came from that study. It was adopted by Republican governor Romney in Massachusetts.

When Obama wanted a health care plan, he tried to get Republicans interested, so the people who devised Romneycare created Obamacare, which basically puts a state plan on a national level so everyone has the same level of protections and access to health insurance. But it is still managed by the states in the sense that each state, whether they use the federal or state exchange, approves the plans and the carriers in that state. This is about the "states rights" Republicans clamor for.

The program, despite the usual glitches, has been pretty successful overall, and the number of uninsured people has dropped considerably. But because this is Obama's plan — despite the conservative Republican origins — they were against it. They lied about it, made fanciful claims about death panels and socialized medicine and other proven falsehoods to discredit Obama. If Obama wasn't elected and Romney got elected in 2008, when he withdrew from the campaign early, he'd likely try to implement this plan and he'd be a Republican hero.

It's sad that people actually believe the BS about it though.

 

[Charlie Prime]

Excuse me but Obamacare is NOT socialized medicine.

How so? When the government controls a thing, it is socialized. I don't understand what you are getting at.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

It is provided by private companies, same as always. The government is not providing the policy or managing it. But there are regulations, but states have always regulated health insurance, so the difference here is that there are Federal standards to be met.

Remember, this is a package based on concepts devised by Republicans in 1989.

 

[manxman]

Bout time aswell, hard to fathom the 'American way' with medical care, when you get good care from cradle to grave here, i mean when you are born into that blueprint for a social care system [NHS], apart from it becoming sacred, hard to figure why America doesnt do it, god help any government that tinkers or under funds the NHS.

 

[Wade]

god help any government that tinkers or under funds the NHS.

I think after a few years that same sentiment will apply here with Obama care. Although I wasn't alive back then i understand that social security was perceived the same way by some of the American public, socialized welfare. While i guess you can still argue today whether it is or not, the point is now it's sacrosanct. It is often called the third rail of politics, as you said God help the person(s) that tinker with it. Having said that it probably does need tinkering today because a common talking point is that without it being overhauled it might not be around by time it's time for us boomers to collect. My feeling is if we just held off from building one or two aircraft carriers, maybe a couple of warships and a few dozen fighters there would be a lot more money for SS. So I guess the culprits here are military heads and companies like Northrop, Boeing and Raytheon.

 

[manxman]

Thats the roundabout point i was clumsily making wade, ofcourse its an election winner for the first party to do it, state run health service, despite the humongous setting up costs, ofcourse the state could just compulsory purchase alot of the current infra-stucture, still cost more than a couple of wars to set up tho, but then it becomes at some point a poisoned chalice.

 

[Charlie Prime]

So I guess the culprits here are military heads and companies like Northrop, Boeing and Raytheon.

The culprit is everyone who wants something for nothing at the expense of others.

The long-term societal results of such basic immorality have been know for thousands of years.

Poverty, decay, violence, filth, and eventually destruction. They chose it.

 

[manxman]

Boooom a charlie special, i love him, i really do no kiddin.

 

[Wade]

The culprit is everyone who wants something for nothing at the expense of others.

The long-term societal results of such basic immorality have been know for thousands of years.

Poverty, decay, violence, filth, and eventually destruction. They chose it.

Well I sure as hell don't want something for nothing but I wouldn't have been able to afford my health plan before Obama care at least now I'm paying something into it and getting something in return...but I've yet to need to do so.. If i had been sick or injured without the new system the burden would have still been on the rest of society, well California society. I'm sure there are people who got the short end of the stick in some cases, but as in life there are some winners and some losers, somewhere along the line i will probably be on the short end of the stick on something and I'll just have to suck it up. In a way i have, although i have had no major illnesses (thank goodness) i have needed some medical care and i work for a small business (was 3 people, now just myself) and for the record i am VERY much against the idea of having the business forced to provide health care for me. It's not his business to do so, although given the size it would be exempt. The point is having no coverage at all i had to go into my pockets somewhat deeply to pay for it, that's life, but I'm not exactly heartbroken that a few others may have to adapt and pay more now.And from what I understand Gene is dead on about the genesis of the plan. I don't know of a time that the Republican party catered to a socialist idea but it was a pragmatically thinking Romney that brought it to the American public. And like Gene mentioned it's a States issue something, I DO very much "believe" in, I'm all for states rights, and yes that goes for the Mr. Perry's decision...from your home state if i recall... not to participate even though the uninsured rate in Texas is 25%. If there is any person or company that doesn't like that decision let them move away, if any person say in California doesn't want to be on the exchange let them move to Texas. it's the "American Way" it's not like Rick hasn't been grabbing for new businesses anyways given the circumstances I think it's a pretty good compromise. Where would we be if our aging group of baby boomers went without some kind of health care net ? Your point about a doomed system could be applied to SS I suppose but again I say part of the reason SS is sinking is because perfectly available funds are being derverted to missles and bombs..something I'm sure you'd agree with...granted we need the money for national infrastructure but I'm sure there would be money left over. For the record i am aware that you are off the grid for the most part and would not be affected one way or another by the rest of the US population and that Obama is not your president, he is ours and Perry is not your governor but belongs to the rest of Texas but say you were part of the national population how would you go about it?

I guess what I mean is what economic/societal models would you prefer. have they been shown historically to have held up and been sustainable elsewhere for an appreciable amount of time without falling into the same traps you mention above?

 

[SheaOlmsford]

The culprit is everyone who wants something for nothing at the expense of others.

The long-term societal results of such basic immorality have been know for thousands of years.

Poverty, decay, violence, filth, and eventually destruction. They chose it.

First of all, I have to bluntly state that I have no idea what you are talking about. But then, I do not listen to right wing blow hards like Rush Limbaugh or any of their ilk. I apologize if I am mistaken, but I cannot imagine where else such a mentality would come from. If you are talking about the fall of Rome, which is blamed on everything from their welfare state, to gay rights, or to the adoption of Christianity (which coincidentally became the state religion not long before the entire system collapsed), I think my third item below would remedy that.

Secondly, if you are so concerned about some poor person getting something for nothing, then I am sure you also are extremely angry at the corporate socialism/welfare that is practiced by the Federal and State governments, who bend over whenever a corporation tells them to.

Thirdly, in countries that have government health care, EVERYONE pays via taxes. It is a form of insurance. You take it out hoping you never need to use it. But if you do need it, treatment is free. I would suggest that for any major illness like cancer, you would have made a great investment since the costs incurred to heal you would be much greater than the taxes you paid. So if you never get sick and just drop dead some day, I guess you helped pay for some poor person's medical care. If that riles you so much in the afterlife that you cannot rest easy, then I guess you could haunt the poor person and drive them to an early grave.

One thing that conservatives seem to refuse to acknowledge nowadays is that you cannot have a society where there is no sense of "community". A nation of self-obsessed Libertarians who believe in the Darwin Survival of the Fittest Meme does not believe in a common good. However, every successful civilization had some sense of the common good. If you are predicting basic immorality (such as having no compassion for anyone but yourself), poverty, decay, violence, filth and destruction, I assume you mean by following the current trajectory of the Republican/Libertarian movement, with their motto of "I've got mine, so screw you, buddy".

 

[Wade]

Seems to me ANY economic/societal models is dependent on the state of humanity underseeing it and that's a fools game now isn't it?

 

[Charlie Prime]

First of all, I have to bluntly state that I have no idea what you are talking about.

I'm talking about philosophy, economics, and history. You can learn about those things, but to do so you must first extricate yourself from the Left/Right, celebrity-driven blather of the television.

The long-term societal results of a system where everyone scrambles to more effectively loot everyone else is well-known. Poverty, decay, violence, filth, and eventually destruction.

Do you understand that whether the looting is done by a giant international corporations and/or hillbillies in Appalachia doesn't matter?