« Do Social Connections Reduce Moral Hazard? | Main | Call for papers: Law and literature conference focused on justice and Amartya Sen »

July 7, 2011

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I thought this was a valuable study and am puzzled by the apparently derisive tone here. I found it via Gina Kolata's article, which may account for the difference in perspective:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/health/policy/07medicaid.html

According to Kolata, "While the findings may seem obvious, health economists and policy makers have long questioned whether it would make any difference to provide health insurance to poor people."

Now, it may be Kolata overstates the importance (or intelligence) of those health economists and policy makers who have questioned what does seem obvious. However, to the extent that these health economists and policy makers have seriously doubted whether it makes a difference in health outcomes, this study makes it much more difficult to make that case.

I certainly have argued against funding stupid research, but if this addresses a fundamental policy issue, then proving the obvious is a valuable service.

Fair enough, Jason--I was simply not aware that the health benefits of free health insurance were in question! But I see your point, I do.

As I understand it, the bill forces all Americans to have health insurance. However, I think that the fine for having no health insurance is around $750. But after the year 2014, health insurance companies will not be able to turn customers away for preexisting conditions. Why wouldnt someone pay the fine or buy low end coverage until they got ill and supplement the coverage or buy an extensive plan....

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

OUR BOOKS
Accepting the Invisible Hand: Market-Based Approaches to Social-Economic Problems, Mark D. White (ed)

Beyond Social Capital: A Critical Approach, Irene van Stavern and Peter Knorringa (eds)

Economics and the Mind, Barbara Montero and Mark D. White (eds)

Ethics and Economics: New Perspectives, Mark D. White and Irene van Staveren (eds)

Ethics in Economics: An Introduction to Moral Frameworks, Jonathan B. Wight

The Feminist Economics of Trade, Irene van Staveren et al (eds)

Handbook of Economics and Ethics, Jan Peil and Irene van Staveren (eds)

The Illusion of Well-Being: Economic Policymaking Based on Respect and Responsiveness, Mark D. White

Kantian Ethics and Economics: Autonomy, Dignity, and Character, Mark D. White

Law and Social Economics: Essays in Ethical Values for Theory, Practice, and Policy, Mark D. White (ed.)

The Manipulation of Choice: Ethics and Libertarian Paternalism, Mark D. White

Retributivism: Essays on Theory and Policy, Mark D. White (ed.)

Saving Adam Smith: A Tale of Wealth, Transformation, and Virtue, Jonathan B. Wight

Street Porter and the Philosopher: Conversations on Analytical Egalitarianism, Sandra J. Peart and David M. Levy (eds)

Teaching the Ethical Foundations of Economics, Jonathan B. Wight and John S. Morton et al

Theoretical Foundations of Law and Economics, Mark D. White (ed.)

The Thief of Time: Philosophical Essays on Procrastination, Chrisoula Andreou and Mark D. White (eds)

The Values of Economics: An Aristotelian Perspective, Irene van Staveren

The Vanity of the Philosopher: From Equality to Hierarchy in Postclassical Economics, Sandra J. Peart and David M. Levy