1. News >
  2. Paul Krugman >
3,827,036 followers   •   28 following   •   New York City   •   http://krugman.blogs.nyti
Nobel laureate. Op-Ed columnist, @nytopinion. Author, “The Return of Depression Economics,” “The Great Unraveling,” “The Age of Diminished Expectations” + more.

Latest Scoops

I wrote about it an embarrassingly long time ago 2/ https://t.co/kxTxu6XyRU
Silly Nick: we've known for a very long time that claims for the heartland's moral superiority were a myth, and it never seems to matter 1/ https://t.co/yi0QeTy7HF
So the cost of the subsidies and Medicaid that people won't receive if the mandate is killed isn't 100% a try cost to those families -- but it's probably a lot closer to 100% than to 0%, which is what Republicans want you to believe 8/
It's also turning the benefits of the ACA -- which are substantial for most people -- into "opt out": the law tells you to sign up or pay a smallish penalty, which makes it natural to sign up; and you end up being very glad you did 7/
Whereas if you make it "opt out", relatively few will choose to un-join. In fact, we also know that many people eligible for Medicaid fail to sign up, from lack of information or sheer inertia. So what the mandate does isn't just about the risk pool 6/
It's exactly like retirement plans where the question of whether they're "opt in" or "opt out" turns out to be crucial. Even if the plan is hugely advantageous -- even if there's not employee contribution required -- many will fail to join if it's "opt in" 5/
The decision to buy or even sign up for health insurance -- CBO says that 5 million of the loss would be in Medicaid, which is free! -- is exactly the kind of thing where behavioral economics tells us that people often fail to make rational decisions 4/
Now, even at face value this misses the point that some of the coverage losses will reflect worsening of the risk pool and hence higher premiums -- not a voluntary choice at all. But that's not the only problem with this argument 3/
The GOP argument is that if you stop requiring that people have insurance, and they end up not getting it, that's their choice, so it's not really a cost to low- and middle-income families 2/
Probably someone else is saying this, but I haven't seen it: the debate over how to count reduced subsidies and Medicaid spending from killing the mandate is a situation where the behavioral economics rubber meets the road 1/ https://t.co/OBzqP1gF5O
Total(1) => 0.072703123092651 f_f_QM(2) => 0.059124231338501 indS(2) => 0.044187784194946 indM(2) => 0.012818098068237 indM_1(2) => 0.003680944442749 indM_2(2) => 0.00079512596130371 indM_4(2) => 0.0019488334655762 indM_5(2) => 0.0020959377288818 indM_6(2) => 0.0011579990386963 indM_7(2) => 0.0015931129455566 indM_8(2) => 0.0010251998901367 f_f_pTL(2) => 0.010836839675903 f_f_dT(20) => 0.01044225692749