Posted on 11/13/2014 12:03:12 PM PST by maggief
As Congress voted on the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, in 2010, one of the bill's architects, MIT economist Jonathan Gruber, told a college audience that those pushing the legislation pitched it as a bill that would control spiraling health care costs even though most of the bill was focused on something else and there was no guarantee the bill would actually bend the cost curve.
In recent days, the past comments of Gruber -- who in this 2010 speech notes that he "helped write the federal bill" and "was a paid consultant to the Obama administration to help develop the technical details as well" -- have been given renewed attention. In previously posted but recently noticed speeches, Gruber discusses how those pushing the bill took part in an "exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter," taking advantage of voters' "stupidity" to create a law that would ultimately be good for them.
In this fourth video, Gruber's language is not as stark as in three previous instances, but his suggestion that Obamacare proponents engaged in less-than-honest salesmanship remains.
"Barack Obama's not a stupid man, okay?" Gruber said in his remarks at the College of the Holy Cross on March 11, 2010. "He knew when he was running for president that quite frankly the American public doesn't actually care that much about the uninsured....What the American public cares about is costs. And that's why even though the bill that they made is 90% health insurance coverage and 10% about cost control, all you ever hear people talk about is cost control. How it's going to lower the cost of health care, that's all they talk about. Why? Because that's what people want to hear about because a majority of American care about health care costs."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
http://www.hughhewitt.com/mits-john-gruber-obamacares-meltdown/
MIT’s John Gruber On Obamacare’s Meltdown
Wednesday, November 13, 2013
posted by Hugh Hewitt
EXCERPT
HH: And last question, the real more is thirty to forty percent before subsidy, taxpayer-funded subsidy in an era of massive deficits. Am I clear on that? That’s your estimate, is that the average cost of insurance for an American is going up thirty to forty percent?
JG: By my estimate, it’s thirty percent before tax credits, but that’s not relevant, because the tax credits will lower the cost. On average, it will fall once you factor in taxes.
HH: Did Americans know that when Obamacare was passed?
JG: Did Americans know, yeah, well, did Americans know that? I don’t know, actually, what Americans knew when Obamacare was passed.
HH: Do you think the President ever said your average cost is going up thirty percent, but you’ll get some tax credits?
JG: No, he didn’t say that.
HH: Do you think Democrats anywhere said that? Did you ever say it on the record?
JG: Did I ever say it, yeah, I did reports for a number of states which said exactly that.
HH: But did you ever come on a show like this and say hey, we’ve got to adopt this, your health insurance is going up thirty percent, but there’ll be some tax credits?
JG: I believe I did, but I don’t know for sure.
HH: I’d love for a citation, Professor. Come back. I appreciate the time very, very much. We’ll post the transcript and the audio of my conversation with Jon Gruber later tonight.
End of interview.
Hello everybody! Happy to be here for my first live chat by Jonathan Gruber March 28, 2012 at 12:01 PM
EXCERPTS
(snip)
Can you explain what the government health plan will cost the individual if he/she makes $20K, 50K, 100K, 200K, Millionaire?by MaryM March 28, 2012 at 12:06 PM
This is very complicated. But roughly speaking most folks won’t be affected. The winners will be those who are low income or in por health. the losers will be those few indiviiduals who are in excellent health and non-poor, who might see their prices in the non-group market go up, and the very wealthiest, who will pay a new Medicare tax . but for most americans you won’t really see a difference by Jonathan Gruber March 28, 2012 at 12:08 PM
(snip)
What are out of work Americans, who can only (barely) afford rent, food and car payment (of they’re lucky) supposed to do when they are sick and need to see a doctor multiple times? State aid doesn’t help those who “make too much” on unemployment, because $340/week is living in the lap of luxury, according to the income guidelines. That tiny bit of money is eaten up in bills and leaves nothing left for co-pays, Rx costs, and health care costs. Were starving, there are no jobs, and if you’re single with no kids, you’re just out of luck. What is our government doing to help those who aren’t playing the system by having multiple illegitimate children and living off of food stamps, HUD housing, and whatever else they can get, and have no intention of getting back to work? What about those who have been looking for a year but can’t find anything that wouldn’t be a pay cut from unemployment? Is help on the way or not?by Jon Wagner March 28, 2012 at 12:11 PM
Great question. The bottom line is that the ACA approach is one where we redistribute towards those in need, but within a budget conscious approach that makes individuals who can afford care pay for it. BAsically those who are below the average income in the U.S. either get free public insurance (if they are very poor) or get tax credits to offset the cost of private insurance, so that no one has to pay more than 9.5% of income for quality insurance. There is a mandate to buy, but htat mandate has an affordability exemption so that no one is mandated if they have to pay more than 8% of income.by Jonathan Gruber March 28, 2012 at 12:13 PM
(snip)
The fact Gruber keeps using the term “stupid” IMO is more revealing than most people think.
Gruber is educated and you can tell from the way he speaks he believes he’s smarter than everyone else.
He wouldn’t use the word “stupid” if he actually meant “ignorant” or he would make himself look ignorant for not knowing the difference.
He specifically used the word “stupid” not “ignorant” to describe the people the lies were aimed at.
IMO he is not referring to people that were too ignorant to know they were being lied to but people that knew they were being lied to but just too stupid to care.
If it’s as I believe and the lies were targeted to people that knew they were being lied to and just too stupid to care then the lies were also targeted to people that knew they were being lied to and they did care.
The lies were intended to divide the American people and create some kind of confrontation, preferably violent, between the two sides.
We’re seeing the exact same technique with the Saintly Gentle Giant right now.
Sounds like “community organizing” 101.
I don’t know if they have much more in the way of options. CNN is about to enter the trash bin of history. I think they have 43 viewers left.
Thanks for your excellent code cracking of Herr Gruber’s use of the word “stupid”!
Why is healthcare so expensive in USA? Does illegal immigration cause this?by alfwats09 March 28, 2012 at 12:23 PM
Illegal immigration has very little to do with it - most illegal immigrants use little health care . It is so expensive because (a) we pay higher prices for medical goods and services than the rest of the world and (b) we treat patients much too intensively, wasting spending that doens’t improve health
What got me to thinking about it I was listening to Rush and we are now starting to see people try and separate themselves from the “stupid” and claim they were “ignorant” and actually believed the lies.
The same time the dems were trying to create a confrontation between the two sides with the lies, the dems were making claims the TEA Party were a bunch of ultra violent, right wing extremist, racist, Tim McVeigh wannabes out to overthrow the govt.
The ACA was passed/signed on March 23(?), 2010, there was an attempted fertilizer car bombing in NYC on May 1, 2010.
The left promptly claimed it was the TEA Party because of their opposition to the ACA being signed into law.
No way possible it could all be “just a coincidence” IMO.
As long as Nancy’s memory improves;)
Another interesting analysis.
The year is 2018
News Headline:
In a newly released video (number 764) Gruber calls American public ‘pond- scum’
“Amazing that CNN let Tapper go with this. He is one of the few one of the with any credibility at CNN.”
If they tried to block Tapper, and he outed them, that would be a terrible blow to their rapidly disappearing non news network.
5-10,000. MOST of them are left wing toilets.
I guess that's one way to put it. But IMO all you need to do is listen to his plain words….
“The American voters are too stupid the understand the difference.”
or
"...call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever…"
Now consider just how much support this bill got form GOP voters or representatives. The "voters" he's talking about are Democrats.
This is also the same time the IRS began targeting the TEA Party and demanding the names of everyone associated with the TEA Party groups.
Had the car bomb gone off and the dems had been successful in pinning the bombing on the TEA Party as they tried, the TEA Party would be declared a terrorist organization and all the names the IRS had obtained would have been turned over to Holder’s DoJ.
WOW....
CNN calling out Pelosi’s lies about Gruber, right now.
Interesting, besides CNN, liberal infinity is carrying this story as a front page or leading story.
What a kind hearted rectum, Herr Gruber was/is:
Thanks for posting this.
“EXCERPT
But Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics professor Jonathan Gruber , who has been an outspoken proponent of the House version of the plan, said his models do not project a huge shift by employers away from their private insurance coverage. And, even if that does happen, it is not necessarily a bad thing, he said.
‘’Insurance is supposed to mean you’re not bankrupted,’’ he said. ‘’Health insurance should not cover all your spending.’’
Gruber agreed that health care costs need to be addressed, but he claimed arguing against the current reform packages on that basis is a case of ‘’perfect being the enemy of good.’’
‘’I agree these plans don’t deal with health care costs in a meaningful way, because we have no clue how to lower health care costs,’’ he said.
‘’Let’s deal with a problem we can solve.’’
Higher out-of-pocket costs could force consumers to pay more attention to the health care they are getting, and thereby lower costs overall, Gruber argued.
Consumers will avoid the health care they do not need, he said.”
Surely, somewhere out in Internet-land, there is a photo that has both Pelosi and Gruber in it.
It would be priceless now that Nancy is saying she doesn’t know Gruber.
[Recall the photo that suddenly appeared when GWB claimed he had never met a certain person in question. I vaguely remember the incident.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.