More on ObamaMart

HealthCare.gov thinks it’s made an improvement: now we can browse—sort of—some notional health “insurance” plans and their notional premiums.  The images below (because the technology is smarter than I am, so I can’t meld them into the single image that exists at HealthCare.gov/how-much-will-marketplace-insurance-cost/) show just how meaningless this “improvement” is.

And

As you can see, the ObamaMart still is withholding any sort of idea of actual costs—explicitly, you don’t get to see deductibles and copays, and you only get to see “premiums” for two age groups—which lump together too many characteristics for these made-up numbers to be taken seriously.

We still have to give our personally identifying information to the ObamaMart doorman, we still have to open an “account” before we can get into the store and poke the shelves.

The IRS knows how to do tables of options based on income.  Adding options based on health conditions—the major factors, like heart disease history, smoking, weight vs height, and so on—for the five plan categories would make a table bigger, perhaps more complex (it might even—the horror!—require more than one table), but it’s eminently doable.  And Americans aren’t as dumb as the Progressives in the White House and HHS think—we can keep up with such a table or set of tables.

This page of notions is just mendacious.

Progressives and “Disruptive”

This is what President Barack Obama had to say (besides his sham “apology,” I mean) in his NBC News interview last week:

I think we, in good faith, have been trying to take on a health care system that has been broken for a very long time.  And what we’ve been trying to do is to change it in the least disruptive way possible.  …  There were folks on the right who said, “Let’s just get rid of– you know, employer deductions for health care.  And give people– a tax credit and they can go buy their own health care in their own market.”  That would have been more disruptive.

Because letting free Americans choose for themselves instead of accepting the diktats of Progressive Government is disruptive.  Sure.

Disruptive for whom, exactly?