Obama '08?

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19267&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD
MORE EVIDENCE THAT STATE TAXES INFLUENCE MOBILITY, JOB CREATION

The Christian Science Monitor reported on the correlation between taxes and mobility. It found that seven of eight states with the biggest population outflows have high state taxes.

States without income taxes tend to do better, says the Monitor:
• Nine states levy no income tax, according to the Tax Foundation: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington State and Wyoming.
• Of those nine, all but one -- Alaska -- saw more people migrating in than out (within the 50 states) during the period from 2000 to 2008, according to research by the Empire Center for New York State Policy.

Taxes matter. So do long-term prospects, says the Monitor:
• The consequences of migration can be significant; most people migrating from one state to another aren't rich, but a good number are big-spending consumers, job-creating entrepreneurs or philanthropists.
• One Boston College study found that New Jersey saw $168 billion in wealth walk out of the state from 2004 to 2008.

If you live in a high-tax state and are thinking about that moving-van idea, remember to think about not just current tax rates but potential future ones as well. States in "fiscal peril" from unmet budget obligations may have to raise taxes, says the Monitor.

Source: Richard S. Davis, "More Evidence That State Taxes Influence Mobility, Job Creation," Washington Alliance for a Competitive Economy, April 16, 2010; based upon: Mark Trumbull, "Tax day 101: Are some states driving people out with high state taxes?" Christian Science Monitor, April 14, 2010.

Would you agree that in the internet age everyone can become a pundit? And that allows people to spout off about an issue without thinking it through?

Quote:

Would you agree that in the internet age everyone can become a pundit? And that allows people to spout off about an issue without thinking it through?

I don't know that it has changed much with people spouting off without thinking. It's just you can do it from your own home now instead of having to go to the local coffee shop to do it.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19240&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD
GAMING THE HEALTH INSURANCE MANDATE

The key to ObamaCare is the individual mandate, which requires individuals to have health insurance or pay a fine. The mandate is supposed to push nearly everyone into the pool to minimize free-riding on the system. But what if millions of Americans decide it's a better deal to pay the fine and remain uninsured until they need coverage? It appears that's exactly what's happening in Massachusetts, which passed its own ObamaCare-like reform with an individual mandate in 2006, says Merrill Matthews, executive director of the Council for Affordable Health Insurance and a resident scholar with the Institute for Policy Innovation.

Last year, Charles Baker, former CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, one of Massachusetts's largest health plans, noticed some health insurance brokers posting comments on his widely read blog. They were suspicious that people were applying for health coverage after a medical condition developed, got the care they needed, and then dropped the coverage.

Coverage for an individual, noted Baker, now a Republican candidate for governor, might be $2,000 to $3,000 a year, while the penalty was only about $900.

So he asked his finance people to see if they noticed any discernible patterns. What did they find?
• From April 2008 to March 2009, 40 percent of the individuals who applied to Harvard Pilgrim stayed covered for less than five months; yet claims were averaging about $2,400 a month, about six times what one would expect.
• Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Massachusetts has now confirmed it is experiencing similar problems; the company says that in 2009, 936 people signed up for three months or less and ran up claims of more than $1,000.

The disparity between the cost of expensive coverage and the fine for not getting it encourages individuals buying their own coverage -- i.e., those not in an employer plan -- to game the system by paying the fine and remaining uninsured until they need coverage, says Matthews.

Insurers have long recognized this problem, known as "adverse selection," which is why every type of insurance normally restricts people from obtaining coverage after an incident has occurred. Someone can't, for example, buy a homeowners policy for a house that is already on fire. But Democrats have decided to do away with that basic actuarial principle with regard to health insurance, says Matthews.

Source: Merrill Matthews, "Gaming The Health Insurance Mandate," Investor's Business Daily, April 19, 2010.

The death of journalism makes me sad and fearful. We need people with 'beats,' highly trained, intelligent people who can interpret and comment on world events. The various news bureaus around the globe have been closing down and consolidating for years.

Look at the nonsense that the righties post here: that Lincoln freed the slaves because of his inherent conservatism and that today's conservatives were the liberals of the 18th and 19th C. What they have to say about the Constitution is even more off beat.

Notice how they complain constantly about the liberal press? A complaint from them means that you . . .or, in this case, the press. . . is on the right track.