Quantcast
Channel: Health Insurance Headlines on One News Page [United States]
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live

Liability Car Insurance for Auto Owners Now Found in Auto Quotes Tool at Insurer Website

0
0
Liability car insurance for auto owners is now included in the policy quotes distributed at the Quotes Pros website. New rates for state minimum coverage are included at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

Miami, FL (PRWEB) June 07, 2014

American car owners who insure their vehicles for state minimum coverage can sometimes benefit from reviewing the rates of multiple agencies to find better pricing. The Quotes Pros company is now generating liability car insurance for auto owners using its real time tool at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

The state minimum protection plans that national or local companies supply to auto owners in the U.S. are usually referred to as liability or base minimum coverage plans. These options provide a certain level of protection although prices can vary greatly depending on the insurer sources used to obtain a quote.

"Drivers using our website can now find liability plans pricing without giving away any type of personal information to review each quote," said a Quotes Pros source.

The car insurance industry has changed in the past few years and more companies are switching to Internet price delivery of rates information. While many companies continue to collect vehicle VIN numbers and driver records, the Quotes Pros quotation system uses a zip code as the primary car owner identifier for each price quote.

"The quotes for liability insurance that any driver can find inside of our system are accurate and are locked in for any motorists who plan to purchase a policy online," said the source.

The Quotes Pros website is now a popular resource to find more than automobile insurance quotes. Any consumer who uses a valid zip code can retrieve prices for life insurance, renters insurance or health insurance prices using the finder at http://quotespros.com/life-insurance.html.

About QuotesPros.com

The QuotesPros.com company is continuing to supply instant price calculations for standard insurance policies through its industry database. The Internet tools this company provides removes many of the standard blockades in the price discovery process of insurance costs. The QuotesPros.com company is now providing vehicle, life, renters, business and health insurance quotations by using a zip code format. All U.S. consumers have access to this acquired industry data online. Reported by PRWeb 6 hours ago.

How Much is Car Insurance: Auto Insurer Website Now Answers Price Quotes for Drivers Online

0
0
One insurance portal is answering how much is car insurance through its new quote portal. The Quotes Pros company is helping drivers price plans at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

Los Angeles, CA (PRWEB) June 07, 2014

Price structures that are used by auto insurance companies for a basic coverage plan often vary depending on driver age, residence and crash histories. The Quotes Pros company is now helping to answer the question of how much is car insurance through use of its insurer tool at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

A direct car insurance quote can be obtained through use of the organized system this year. The 24/7 access that is currently supplied to vehicle owners has been improved with new partners that exist inside the network of insurers used to build the Quotes Pros search tool.

"Price quotes for insurance are common on the Internet although our system needs only a zip code to produce a protection policy price compared to information gathering used by actual insurers," said one source at the Quotes Pros company.

The ability to pay less for vehicle insurance is provided to users of the quotes system due to the amount of companies supplying prices. The average American receives one to three quotes in price before a policy is purchased, according to industry standards.

"The finder tool now presents a list of companies competing for low prices throughout the U.S. and this can help expose the cheapest rates available," said the source.

The Quotes Pros company is continuing its trend of offering quotations for insurance coverage on the Internet this year be increasing its consumer level access. Consumers can review life insurance, business insurance, renters insurance and medical insurance policies using the optimized system at http://quotespros.com/health-insurance.html.

About QuotesPros.com

The QuotesPros.com company is one of the definitive resources that American consumers depend on for pricing vehicle insurance plans are the Internet. This company uses different tools to connect to industry providers to help consumers instantly price coverage plans. The QuotesPros.com company has enabled use of its website to provide daily access to the public while comparing a list of agency prices to offline pricing supplied by local companies. Reported by PRWeb 5 hours ago.

Connecticut Obamacare Exchange Reports Potential Identity Theft of Enrollees

0
0
Connecticut Obamacare Exchange Reports Potential Identity Theft of Enrollees Officials at the Connecticut public health exchange that administers Obamacare reported on Saturday that they are unable to determine whether personal information found in a backpack on a Hartford city street Friday was related to an effort to steal personal information of enrollees of the exchange.

CNBC reports that the “very serious” data breach could be the first known case of identity theft associated with Obamacare enrollment information.

Four notepads with the personal information of approximately 400 people -- including names, Social Security numbers and birth dates of customers of the state’s health insurance exchange -- were discovered in the backpack, reports the Hartford Courant.

“The notepads initially appear to belong to an employee of Maximus, the vendor providing call center services to Access Health CT,” said Peter Van Loon, the chief operating officer of the exchange. “Close examination of the data is indicating that fewer than 200 Social Security numbers were contained on the pads.”

Access Health CT spokeswoman Kathleen Tallarita said Friday that she did not know the time the backpack was found or its proximity to the exchange’s office.

Van Loon added that an investigation continues into the source of the breach. 

“Access Health CT has begun calling individuals whose names were handwritten on the work papers to inform them of this potential breach,” he said. “Consumers will be offered the following remedies… at no cost: credit monitoring, fraud resolution, identity theft insurance, and security freezes of credit reports.”

According to the Courant, Hartford police arrived at the exchange office at about 2:15 p.m. Friday to meet with an Access Health CT staff member “regarding an employee possibly taking customers’ personal information,” said Deputy Police Brian Foley.

Access Health CT CEO Kevin Counihan said in a written statement that he had instructed his staff to work with Maximus, the exchange’s call center vendor, and the exchange’s outreach team to address the potential for identity theft. In addition, the exchange’s legal department is filing state and federal information breach reports.

During the Obamacare enrollment period from October through March, 208,301 people signed up for health insurance coverage through Access Health CT, including 78,713 who purchased private plans and 129,588 who were deemed eligible for Medicaid. Reported by Breitbart 58 minutes ago.

Gripes About Health Costs Punctuate A Cross-Country Trip

0
0
A health reporter traveled across the country and asked people how they feel about health care and health insurance. At almost every stop people complained about the expense. Reported by NPR 19 hours ago.

New Hampshire businesses vexed by insurance delay

0
0
New Hampshire businesses aren't happy with the latest delay in the small group health insurance market created by the Affordable Care Act, but some are more understanding than others. Reported by Miami Herald 17 hours ago.

No shortage of info in Detroit bankruptcy

0
0
Retired Detroit bus driver Art Vardiman recently received a computer disk in the mail that contains hundreds of pages of documents. He also got a six-page blue ballot about cuts to his pension and a white one about health insurance. A 25-page notice explains why the changes are being proposed in Detroit's historic bankruptcy. Reported by Miami Herald 14 hours ago.

Call center worker on leave for health data breach

0
0
Connecticut's health insurance exchange says the owner of a backpack found on a Hartford street containing Social Security numbers and other data works for a call center vendor and has been placed on administrative leave. Reported by Miami Herald 11 hours ago.

Low Car Insurance Prices for Florida Drivers Added Online to Automotive Quote System

0
0
Low car insurance prices for drivers in Florida are now a feature inside the Quote Pros price tool online. Drivers can now explore PIP coverage and complex plans at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

Tampa, FL (PRWEB) June 08, 2014

Drivers in Florida are now required by state legislation to carry a minimum amount of personal insurance protection in a standard vehicle policy. The Quotes Pros company is now one agency helping motorists to find low car insurance prices in the state of Florida through its quote tool at http://quotespros.com/auto-insurance.html.

The use of this tool provides any driver with a simple way to find lower prices through national or state licensed agents. There are now more partners inside of the tool that scours the country for affordable insurance costs and this information is now presented to Florida motorists online.

"There are different levels of insurer pricing that a driver is often presented and knowing which prices are above or below industry norms can be helpful during research," said a source at the Quotes Pros company.

The affordable automobile insurance price structures that are explorable by Florida car owners using the Quotes Pros company includes more than PIP coverage options. Any website visitor can review options for SR22, full coverage, antique or non owner coverage plans that are applicable statewide.

"The vehicle insurance providers that our system matches for motorists range from small to large companies to help maintain variety in prices to help car owners choose the best plans," the source included.

The QuotesPros.com company website now provides solutions for the public when not searching for forms of auto insurance coverage. A person can now explore special rates for life insurance, renters insurance or health insurance using the special page at http://quotespros.com/health-insurance.html.

About QuotesPros.com

The QuotesPros.com company provides the public with viable ways to examine and compare different insurance products costs on the Internet. The company has a staff that helps to find different agencies to include inside the database program consumers use daily. The QuotesPros.com company allows open access to its price tools to help give consumers more flexibility when researching different companies in the insurance business. Rates for vehicle, business, life, renters and health are available 24/7. Reported by PRWeb 10 hours ago.

Here's Your Complete Preview Of This Week's Big Economic Events

0
0
Here's Your Complete Preview Of This Week's Big Economic Events It's a fairly quiet week in the U.S..  On Friday, we saw the U.S. economy added 217,000 nonfarm payrolls in May, while the unemployment rate held steady at 6.3%.

All eyes will now turn to the retail sales report for confirmation of an economic snapback.

We also have three Fed speeches on Monday. St. Louis Federal Reserve president James Bullard will speak on the economy and monetary policy in Florida.

Boston Federal president, Eric Rosengreen, is slated to speak on monetary policy in Guatemala.

Finally, Fed Gov. Daniel Tarullo will speak on corporate governance in Washington.

Here's your Monday Scouting Report:

*Top Story*

· *Winter Weakness**: *Following the modest beat in the May jobs report, Paul Ashworth at Capital Economics wrote that those who attributed the economic weakness in the first quarter to the unusually harsh winter, have won the argument. "The robust 217,000 increase in non-far payrolls in May is another illustration that the economy is back on the right track after the weather-related weakness during the winter," Ashworth wrote. "May's gain followed an even stronger 282,000 increase in April, although we suspect that the latter was boosted a little by the unwinding of the earlier weather distortion."*
*
· *Rise Of Investor Complacency**:* Despite the European Central Bank’s move to push rates into negative territory on Thursday, investors were disappointed. “Markets expect a lot from central banks these days, and despite a comprehensive set of measures from Mr. Draghi, traders sniffed at the absence of QE,” writes Claus Vistesen at Pantheon Macroeconomics. “Such over-expectancy on the part of investors is a sign of complacency.” Vistesen writes that talk of a ‘great moderation’ has returned as low volatility has raised hopes of “a return to bull markets and rapid growth.”
· *The Changing Face Of The FOMC**:* All eyes are now on the three new members voting at the June FOMC meeting. “This change-over will add some uncertainty to the policy debate and the distribution of the June ‘dot plot,’ writes Michael Hanson at Bank of America Merrill Lynch. The dot plot refers to the chart that shows the predicted path of the federal funds rate. “…However, we don’t expect these current or potential future personnel changes to fundamentally alter the majority support for a gradual exit with rates below their historical average for some time."

*Economic Calendar
*

· Treasury budget (Wed): Economists are looking for a $130 billion deficit in May. This compared to a $106.9 billion surplus in April.
· Initial Jobless Claims (Thurs): Economists expect initial claims fell to 309,000, from 312,000 in the May 31 week. "It appears that the extended period of extreme week-to-week volatility may be over,” write economists at Citi. “Importantly, the four-week moving average is settling into a new lower range after several months near 320K.”
· Retail sales (Thurs): Economists estimate that retail sales will rise 0.6% month-over-month in May, compared to a 0.1% rise the previous month. Meanwhile, core retail sales (ex-auto and gas) are expected to rise 0.4% MoM, following a 0.1% fall in April. "Higher spending on general merchandise and higher cost on health insurance due to the Affordable Care Act are likely to be key sources of the gain in this month," according to the economists at TD Securities. "We expect this report to reinforce the current constructive narrative on the economic recovery, pointing to further positive momentum in household spending—consistent with the rebound seen in household sentiment and labor market activity in recent months."
· Business inventories (Thurs): Economists expect business inventories to climb 0.4% on the month in April, following a 0.4% rise in March. “Manufacturers’ inventories have already been reported as rising, but the recent surprisingly strong import growth suggests larger increases for retail and wholesale inventories,” write economists at Citi. “Note: The large import surge in April suggests that retailers and wholesalers believed that consumer demand would pick up sharply after being cooled by the weather all winter.”
· PPI (Fri): Economists are looking for produce prices to rise 0.1% on the month in May, compared with a 0.6% rise in April. Meanwhile, core producer prices (ex-food and energy) 0.1% on the month, compared to a 0.5% rise the previous month.
· Consumer sentiment (Fri): Economists are looking for University of Michigan consumer confidence to rise to 83 in June, from 81.9 the previous month. "Underlying our forecast are equity markets, which have moved higher and experienced reduced volatility relative to May, as well as initial jobless claims, which have been grinding lower in recent weeks," write Barclays economists.

*Market Commentary*

U.S. stocks ended higher with the Dow and S&P 500 hitting new record highs on Friday. "In line with the recent trend, this week’s push higher lacked a specific catalyst. However, while the macro narrative remained little changed, there were several positive dynamics at work,” according to the folks at FactSet.

One of those would be the European Central Bank's historic rate cut, which made it the first major central bank to push rates into negative territory. The ECB also announced a string of easing measures. 

"While there were no meaningful surprises out of this week's sell-side conferences, there seemed to be more focus on the pickup in earnings growth coming out of Q1. Strategists also continued to highlight improved earnings revision trends,” according to FactSet.

Meanwhile, Brian Belski at BMO Capital Markets writes that falling rates are not signaling a weaker economy. “The recent divergence between Treasury yields and stock prices has some investors nervous based on our client conversations,” writes Belski. “The predominant line of thinking is that lower rates portend softer economic growth. However, we believe these investors may be over-emphasizing the significance of the recent decoupling.”

"Based on our work, periods of interest rate and stock price decoupling are fairly common and most of the time stocks “get it right.” In addition, the recent drop in rates appears to be more technical in nature from our lens given that trends in important economic indicators have improved significantly since the start of the year."

For more insight about the middle market, visit mid-marketpulse.com.

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 9 hours ago.

Socialism Comes To Seattle

0
0
Socialism Comes To Seattle Submitted by Pater Tenebrarum via Acting-Man blog,

-*Seattle Bows to Demand of Socialist Councilwoman Kshama Sawant*-

*Economic science has long shown that labor is not magically exempted from the laws of supply and demand.* Therefore, minimum wage laws hurt rather than help workers, especially those with few skills or those just starting out, who are on the lowest rungs of the ladder. If one wants to raise youth unemployment and price unskilled workers out of the market, there is no surer way than introducing a minimum wage – especially one that is far higher than what the market can bear.

Note that a great deal of so-called 'pro labor' legislation that instituted wage minimums has only belatedly adjusted the legal minimum wage to levels the market economy was already able to provide, due to the increase in capital invested per worker.  If the extent of the legally mandated minimum wage does not exceed what the market can bear, it mainly serves to polish the image of politicians, while the harm is at least limited. This is however not to say that there is no harm done at all by the introduction of such wage price controls, even if the levels seem reasonable.

After all, the economy is subject to frequent booms and busts under the current monetary regime, and if wages are inflexible to the downside, unemployment will tend to soar during the bust phases. The huge unemployment rates during the Great Depression were a direct result of president Hoover 'persuading' companies not to drop wage rates, in spite of a sharp fall in prices and a genuine money supply deflation.

*Seattle is one of the few municipalities in the US boasting of an openly socialist council member, Ksahma Sawant.* As the author of this article at Forbes rightly notes, it is quite astonishing that this purveyor of bad economics (she not only supports minimum wage laws, but also rent controls and it seems she wants Amazon to be nationalized as well) is actually teaching an economics course at the Seattle Central Community College.

*As a politician, one of her central demands was the introduction of a $15/hr. Minimum wage in Seattle.* The city council has now bowed to this demand, a decision that is likely to prove extremely destructive, especially to small businesses (interestingly, businesses have been allowed to 'phase the wage in over a three to seven year period', a fact that immediately belies the assertion that this legislation won't hurt business. If it is so harmless, why can it not be adopted right away?). NBC reports:



“The Seattle City Council on Monday unanimously approved a $15 hourly minimum wage — the highest in the nation.

 

The ordinance, which phases in the increase over time, passed a committee last week with a few changes. It would take effect next April and allow a sub-minimum wage for teens.

 

The ordinance was drafted by an advisory group of labor, business and nonprofit representatives convened by Seattle Mayor Ed Murray. It would phase in wage increases over three to seven years, depending on the size of the business and employee benefits.

 

*The City Council voted 9-0 in front of a sometimes raucous audience that frequently interjected cheers, applause and shouts of "Shame on you!" as the council debated several changes to the measure.* *Seattle's higher minimum wage would surpass San Francisco's minimum of $10.74 an hour.*

 

[…]

 

*Some small business owners worry that a higher minimum wage could put them out of business.*

*Meanwhile, a group called 15 Now led by Socialist Seattle City Council member Kshama Sawant is collecting signatures for a ballot measure that would create an immediate wage hike for large businesses and a three-year phase-in for small business.*

 

*"Our victory is not complete, but we have fought until the last day, the last hour, against all the loopholes demanded by business," Sawant said before the council vote. "$15 in Seattle is just the beginning."*



(emphasis added)

*Ms. Sawant has actually studied economics, which makes this all the more astounding. *Anyway, she and her followers are certain to be taught a real life lesson in economics now. Unfortunately, many small business owners and their employees will lose their livelihood as a result. Ms. Savant herself has of course nothing to fear in this regard,  as her income is paid by taxpayers.

 

Kshama Sawant, raising her fist in the well-known socialist greeting

(Photo by Elaine Thompson, AP)

 

-*The Downward Spiral is Already Underway*-

Seattle seems eager to become the next Detroit. As 'United Liberty' reports, the negative effects of the minimum wage law can be ascertained already, as the $15 minimum wage has been introduced in advance in the Seatac suburb of Seattle. Predictably, the groups that suffer the most from the negative consequences of the new legislation are workers themselves and small business owners.

United writes:



“The Emerald City may witness the economic dangers of hiking the minimum wage to $15/hour sooner rather than later. *SeaTac, a suburb of Seattle, hiked the minimum wage for certain service industry employees to $15 at the beginning of the year, and there are already signs that the sudden increase is having a negative impact.*

 

Earlier this month, Seattle voted to raise its minimum wage gradually to $15 by the year 2020. Unlike the SeaTac wage hike, Seattle’s hike will apply to all businesses.

 

But 15 minutes south near the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, employees are already seeing the negative effects of such a hike. A February report from the Seattle Times revealed:

 

*“At the Clarion Hotel off International Boulevard, a sit-down restaurant has been shuttered, though it might soon be replaced by a less-labor-intensive cafe… *Other businesses have adjusted in ways that run the gamut from putting more work in the hands of managers, to instituting a small “living-wage surcharge” for a daily parking space near the airport.”

 

[…]

 

*“Are you happy with the $15 wage?” I asked the full-time cleaning lady.*

 

*“It sounds good, but it’s not good,” the woman said.*

 

*“Why?” I asked.*

 

*“I lost my 401k, health insurance, paid holiday, and vacation,” she responded. “No more free food,” she added.*

 

*The hotel used to feed her. Now, she has to bring her own food. Also, no overtime, she said. She used to work extra hours and received overtime pay.*

 

What else? I asked.

 

“I have to pay for parking,” she said. I then asked the part-time waitress, who was part of the catering staff.

 

*“Yes, I’ve got $15 an hour, but all my tips are now much less,” she said. Before the new wage law was implemented, her hourly wage was $7. But her tips added to more than $15 an hour. Yes, she used to receive free food and parking. Now, she has to bring her own food and pay for parking.*

 

[...]

 

The Washington Policy Center, a free market think tank, said the passed-but-not-yet-implemented wage hike is already affecting small businesses in Seattle:

 

*“After decades in Seattle, Northwest Caster and Equipment recently made the difficult decision to move the business to unincorporated Lynnwood, according to a report by KOMO news.  The owner of the family business blames Seattle’s increasingly difficult business climate for the move:  “It just seems like increasingly the city’s become a more difficult place to do business.”*

 

The city’s proposed $15 minimum wage was tops on the list of complaints.  “If I’m going to bring someone in on an entry level, I’d prefer to start them out where I’d like to start them out, rather than having that dictated to me.”

 

*A commercial property landlord echoes those concerns about the $15 minimum wage, noting several tenants have signaled they may not renew their leases if it becomes law: “It’s just too expensive to operate in the city.”*

 

And in a story today, KUOW reports that *small businesses throughout the city are panicking over the super high minimum wage.  Multiple small business owners told KUOW they are holding off on opening new business or expanding their current business in Seattle, while others said they are delaying plans to hire new workers.”*



(emphasis added)

The problem with minimum wage laws is not only that they are economic nonsense bound to lower growth and destroy job opportunities for young and unskilled workers. A major problem is that they represent an infringement of liberty. As Dr. Machan writes on this point:



“[...] being entitled to a minimum wage is actually unjustified, even if the law affirms it, because it violates the rights of individuals to trade freely—one of the implications of their right to liberty. If people freely enter into an employment relationship that specifies certain work provided for a certain wage, this isn’t something the law may void, since it is their right to do so; the minimum wage law violates this right.”



Most people look at minimum wage laws only from the perspective that they force employers to pay a certain wage to the least productive employees. They forget that they also force workers not to offer their labor services below the prevailing minimum wage rate. And yet, such workers undoubtedly exist, especially in light of the fact that they may otherwise simply not find any employment at all.

-*Conclusion*-

*Seattle's city council has made a grave mistake by bowing to the demands of the socialist faction.* Many small businesses will be forced to close or move somewhere else. Since small businesses create the vast bulk of new jobs, the Seattle city council may eventually not only find itself with a shrinking tax base, but also a growing unemployment rate. This can be expected to be accompanied by rising crime rates and growing strains on social services.

*Politicians cannot repeal the laws of economics.* They might as well try to repeal gravity or order the sun not to shine. And yet, basic economic lessons seemingly need to be retaught over and over again. Unfortunately, this usually happens at a great cost, as these interventions inevitably cause misery for countless people.

 

*Socialism – ideas so good, they have to be mandatory.*

(Cartoon by: Mike Lecter) Reported by Zero Hedge 7 hours ago.

Virginia State Senator Shockingly Resigns After Cutting A Deal With Republicans

0
0
Virginia State Senator Shockingly Resigns After Cutting A Deal With Republicans A Virginia state senator is set to resign on Monday after cutting a deal with Republicans, a stunning move that gives the state GOP the upper hand in an ongoing fight over the state's budget and an expansion of the Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act.

Democratic state Sen. Phillip Puckett will step down on Monday, news first reported by The Washington Post. According to the report, Puckett's resignation leads the way for him to get a job as deputy director of the state tobacco commission and for his daughter to be confirmed for a state judgeship.It also means Republicans now have a 20-19 majority in the state Senate, something that could stall an expansion of the Medicaid program in the middle of an increasingly tenuous, partisan fight over the state budget.

Puckett's office confirmed he will make the announcement on Monday but declined to discuss specifics of the deal that reportedly led to his resignation — a deal some characterized as "bribery."

A furious Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, called the situation "unacceptable."

"I am deeply disappointed by this news and the uncertainty it creates at a time when 400,000 Virginians are waiting for access to quality health care, especially those in Southwest Virginia," McAuliffe said.

"This situation is unacceptable, but the bipartisan majority in the Senate and I will continue to work hard to put Virginians first and find compromise on a budget that closes the coverage gap."

Virginia's government is rapidly veering toward a shutdown if neither side budges from its Medicaid position before July 1. McAuliffe says an expansion must be part of the new budget, while Republicans have so far resisted his calls.

Virginia is one of 24 states that has not expanded the Medicaid program under the law known as Obamacare. McAuliffe campaigned on a promise to change that.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, almost 100,000 Virginians would be eligible for coverage under the expansion. More than 6 million people nationwide have enrolled in the Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Programs since the law has begun being implemented.

Puckett's resignation gives Republicans an outright majority in the state Senate. The previous 20-20 split gave Democrats a de-facto majority, since Virginia's lieutenant governor would cast a tie-breaking vote. Virginia's Republican-controlled House is staunchly opposed to an expansion of Medicaid.

In his statement, however, McAuliffe offered a reminder that three moderate Republican state senators had offered sentiments of support for Medicaid expansion. Their votes could theoretically make Republicans' majority obsolete.

Join the conversation about this story » Reported by Business Insider 5 hours ago.

Trader Joe's Proves That Obamacare Can Free Us From The Wrong Jobs

0
0
Late last year, Melissa O'Rourke found out that her employer, Trader Joe's, would no longer be offering health care coverage to part-time workers like herself. As of 2014, O'Rourke would have to find her own insurance plan under the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.

The company's widely discussed policy change, first reported by The Huffington Post, prompted a bit of soul-searching on O'Rourke's part. She had spent about nine years working for the grocer -- several years longer than she'd anticipated when she first came on. A change seemed long overdue.

By the end of January, O'Rourke had enrolled in Obamacare and left the Trader Joe's crew.

"Honestly, the health insurance was one of the the few things keeping me there," O'Rourke, 37, said.

For decades, health coverage in the U.S. has been closely linked to employment. The vast majority of Americans have received health coverage through their jobs and will continue to do so in the Obamacare era. But they no longer have to.

The idea was central to the president's sweeping health care reform law: By "decoupling" insurance coverage from employment, you give people more control over their careers and their lives. That could mean switching jobs, working fewer hours or perhaps not working at all. (The latter two choices, laid out in projections by the Congressional Budget Office last year, were widely mischaracterized by Republicans as job losses expected under Obamacare.)

"We've talked for years about 'job lock' -- staying in jobs just to keep the benefits," said Paul Fronstin, a researcher at the Employee Benefit Research Institute, a nonprofit that examines the role of workplace benefits in the economy. "The Affordable Care Act completely changes the playing field. You don't need your employer anymore for health benefits. You can go to an exchange and get coverage without worrying about a pre-existing condition."

In O'Rourke's case, the new coverage has given her the chance to become a full-time labor organizer. She's wrapping up her undergraduate degree in labor studies and plans to help launch a worker center in Indianapolis. She said she probably would have left Trader Joe's earlier, but persistent health issues made the idea of forgoing coverage unimaginable.

Thanks to a subsidy, the monthly premium for O'Rourke's new plan under Obamacare comes to less than $27. Under her group plan at Trader Joe's, she said, she paid around $70 a month for comparable coverage.

"It's quite a bit less, and the coverage as far as I can tell is pretty similar," said O'Rourke. The one clear distinction is that her new plan doesn't include vision and dental.

It's rare for a retail company to offer part-time workers decent and affordable health coverage. Outside of exceptions like Trader Joe's, most such employees would have qualified only for limited plans that capped their available benefits -- the so-called "mini-med" plans common in lower-wage food and retail jobs. If they opted in, workers would pay relatively high prices for generally poor coverage. (The Affordable Care Act banned many such plans.) With a median salary of $21,400 in the industry, most part-time retail workers get by on meager earnings to begin with.

Bryce Williams, managing director at the human resources consultancy Towers Watson, said many part-time retail employees are seeing coverage for the first time in years. His firm has consulted for companies to help part-timers navigate the exchanges and find "the best bang for the buck" under Obamacare, he said.

"In most cases, whatever an employer did or didn't do, these exchange-based plans will be a better deal than what these employees had available to them," Williams said. "Many of these part-time workers have never qualified for group coverage before."

Trader Joe's' coverage of any worker who averaged at least 18 hours a week was unusually generous for the grocer's field. After HuffPost reported that the company would steer workers toward the Obamacare exchanges if they averaged fewer than 30 hours, about two dozen employees emailed HuffPost about the change. They were almost uniformly infuriated. Many said they had remained at the company in large part because of the insurance.

For some, that anger has started to fade.

One worker, who requested anonymity because she still works for Trader Joe's, emailed HuffPost in September to say she was filled with "fear and confusion and HEARTBREAK" after getting the company's memo explaining the change. Initially unable to secure a plan under Obamacare, she ended up taking out a loan to purchase a semester's worth of health coverage at the art school where she's enrolled part-time.

But come March, she was approved for Medicaid under the program's expansion to low-income adults in New York state. Although she spent several thousand dollars for insurance for the first half of this year, she's now receiving free coverage. She continues to work three days a week at Trader Joe's. In a more recent interview, she called the company's move "a very poor decision" but said she believes it's still a good job.

"It shook my trust in them a little bit," she said. "The only reason I stayed is it's such a flexible job and the pay is still really good for retail. I can't knock that at all. That's why I stuck around. But there are others who had no reason to stay."

Like O'Rourke, this worker says she knew colleagues who bolted from Trader Joe's once company coverage was dropped for part-timers, saying "the health care was what was keeping them there."

Most of the Trader Joe's workforce is employed full-time, so it's hard to say how significant the turnover may have been due to the policy change, or what kind of training costs it came with. The company -- known for its reticence, and perhaps wary of wading into any story involving Obamacare -- declined to answer questions for this article.

In his original memo to workers last August, Trader Joe's CEO Dan Bane said the company believed most part-timers would be better off financially on the exchanges than on company-sponsored coverage. To soften the landing, the company offered qualifying workers a flat payment of $500 to help buy new insurance. (Many workers complained to HuffPost that those payments were taxed at the rate of a bonus, making them less ample than they seemed.)

"Depending on income you may earn outside of Trader Joe's, we believe that with the $500 from Trader Joe's and the tax credits available under the ACA, many of you should be able to obtain health care coverage at very little if any net cost to you," Bane wrote in the memo.

Gary Claxton, vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit that focuses on health policy research, said the exchanges should offer most of those part-time workers a better deal, unless they happen to have high income and don't qualify for a nice subsidy. The new tax incentive to be taken advantage of would make it a "win-win" in many situations for both the employer and the worker, he said.

"I don't think they would have done it if they didn't think it would help them with their workforce," Claxton said of Trader Joe's. "They didn't do it to save just a little money. They did it because they thought it would give them a better place in the labor market."

Of course, not everyone wins. O'Rourke said she knew colleagues whose quotes on the exchange weren't nearly as attractive as their Trader Joe's company plans, owing to other family income.

Seeing as it came on the heels of a cut in contributions to workers' retirement accounts, O'Rourke said she feels the company dropped coverage for part-timers to help itself more than its employees. She noted that many workers had to scramble to meet Trader Joe's 30-hour-a-week threshold for full-time work, thereby guaranteeing they could keep their company health plans. Some who'd hoped to clear that bar at the end of last year didn't make it.

"I definitely think they did use it as an excuse, and it's benefiting their bottom line much more than workers'," she said.

Some workers may be paying more for their insurance under Obamacare but enjoying new opportunities at the same time. Edan Lichtenstein, 36, decided to leave his Trader Joe's store in Washington, D.C., shortly after the company dropped part-timers from its plans. The plan he got on the exchange runs about $260 a month, and he didn't qualify for much of a subsidy due to his freelance income last year.

Even though he's now paying more for coverage, Lichtenstein said his career is headed in a more appropriate direction. With a bachelor's degree, he'd never intended to work on the floor at Trader Joe's for the four years that he did. He "would have taken more risks, but there was the health insurance issue," he said.

After he left Trader Joe's, he took a three-month course in writing code and building apps. He's now working part-time at a startup and looking for a full-time job where he can use more of his education. Obamacare provided him with an opening to leave retail, and he's grateful for it.

"I felt I was lucky," Lichtenstein said of quitting Trader Joe's. "It wasn't the end of the world for me. I didn't have kids and stuff. There were people there without the leverage or who weren't as lucky as I am, and they needed that job a lot more than I did." Reported by Huffington Post 19 hours ago.

America's Most Stressed States Are...

0
0
America's Most Stressed States Are... Florida is the most stressed-out state in the lower 48 and that has nothing to do with pythons , shark attacks , or drug-dealing mayors , according to a new study. Real-estate blog Movoto used factors including commuting times, housing prices, and lack of health insurance to arrive at its findings. It ranked... Reported by Newser 18 hours ago.

What's at Stake in Hobby Lobby

0
0
This June the Supreme Court will decide whether a corporation can claim an exemption from a federal law on religious grounds. The media has mischaracterized the case, Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby, either as an attack on the Affordable Care Act or as a threat to women's access to contraceptives. The media misses the real point. Regardless of how the Court decides, women will still have access to contraception, and Obamacare will survive. But a decision in favor of Hobby Lobby would undermine both corporate law and the separation of church and state.

Hobby Lobby is a chain of more than five-hundred arts-and-crafts stores with more than ten-thousand employees. The company's stock is owned by members of the Green family, who profess to run their business empire according to Christian precepts. The Greens don't object to providing employee health insurance. However, they do object to a regulation issued under Obamacare that requires coverage for certain forms of contraception such as the "morning after pill." The Green family claims that covering this kind of contraceptive violates Christian beliefs.

Hobby Lobby bases its argument on another federal statute, the Restoration of Religious Freedom Act (RFRA). RFRA provides that the federal government can't impose a law of general application on a "person" if it would substantially burden their free exercise of religion, unless there is no less burdensome way to accomplish a compelling governmental objective. Hobby Lobby argues that the government has no compelling purpose for forcing them to provide such insurance to their employees. The case turns on whether a profit-making corporation is a "person," for purposes of RFRA and can therefore claim an exemption based on the religion of its shareholders.

Should corporations enjoy the same constitutional rights that natural persons have? In Citizens United the Supreme Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to participate in elections by making unlimited campaign contributions. One could reasonably defend the Citizens United decision by arguing that the Court was defending the public's right to hear what corporations have to say. But Hobby Lobby goes much farther towards claiming that a corporation really is the same as a natural person.

Anthropomorphosizing corporations would be a bizarre and dangerous shift in our legal system. Our law has always distinguished profit-making corporations from natural persons. The separation of the corporation's legal identity from its shareholders gives investors the confidence to invest and grow our economy.

A decision in favor of Hobby Lobby would call into question this separation between a corporation and its shareholders. If we can attribute shareholders' religious beliefs to their corporation, then why not attribute a company's liabilities to its shareholders?

Hobby Lobby's argument would open the door to endless litigation: If one shareholder's religious beliefs differs from another's, or if management's religious beliefs differ from shareholders, whose religious convictions are attributable to the company? Can a profit-making company held by a shareholder who believe in Christian Science refuse to provide health insurance to its employees on the grounds that it offends its religious convictions? Can religious opposition to women or hiring people of other faiths, races, or ethnicities allow a corporation to claim an exemption from the civil rights laws? And how could federal courts judge the authenticity of a corporation's religious convictions?

One might ask whether it's fair to compel a corporation to pay insurance premiums for its employees if it offends the religious views of its shareholders. The Greens cannot reasonably control how an employee spends her compensation. Insurance benefits, like wages, are a form of employee compensation. Whether an employee pays for contraceptives from her wages or from her insurance benefits, hardly burdens the religious practices of the corporation's shareholders, even if it may offend their beliefs.

Let's face it, the Greens have benefited in myriad ways from the separation of their corporation from its shareholders. The Greens don't pay taxes on the income of Hobby Lobby. They can't be sued for Hobby Lobby's liabilities. The separation of the corporate entity has enabled the Greens to amass a vast business enterprise. They have enjoyed the benefits of this separation, so why should they now complain that they are inseparable?

Some conservatives have tried to frame Obamacare as threatening the First Amendment right to worship. But that argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court's decision in a case known as Smith. In 1990 Justice Scalia held that a tribal member of the Native American Church who used peyote, a controlled substance, as part of the traditional religious worship service, could be criminally prosecuted. Scalia wrote that the First Amendment only required the government to have some reasonable basis for imposing the law, even if it prohibited someone from exercising his religious practice. Scalia admitted that upholding a law of general application against an individual's claim of religious freedom "will place at a relative disadvantage those religious practices that are not widely engaged in; but that unavoidable consequence of democratic government must be preferred to a system in which each conscience is a law unto itself."

Surely, the Court cannot now decide that the First Amendment affords greater protection to the Christian beliefs of a corporation than it provides to the Native American Church.

The separation of corporations from their shareholders preserves our economic vitality just as the separation of church and state protects our freedom to worship. Both legal principles would be ill served by a judgment in favor of Hobby Lobby. Reported by Huffington Post 17 hours ago.

Experient Health Offers Safety Tips For Using Fireworks In Latest Blog Posts

0
0
Staying safe while using fireworks to celebrate Independence Day tops Experient Health's list of summer safety tips shared in its latest blog posts.

Richmond, Va. (PRWEB) June 09, 2014

As warmer weather arrives and more families buy personal fireworks to use on Independence Day, Experient Health encourages everyone to follow a few extra safety tips to prevent fires and remain injury free.

"While the bright colors and flashing lights of fireworks are a great addition to a summer party, make sure you use common sense and a few basic safety guidelines to keep the fun from turning into a fire or injury," Experient Health wrote in its latest Blog post.

Experient Health, a Virginia Farm Bureau Company, launched its Blog series - Live Well, Work Well - last year to not only help the community better understand health insurance amid the changes under the Affordable Care Act, but to also showcase ways to live healthier lives. A healthy lifestyle is the key to preventative healthcare and offers the best insurance for the body.

Among the tips offered in the fireworks tips post were the following:· Buy fireworks from a reputable source. Do not use homemade fireworks.

· Be sure to find out the state's laws for fireworks. Different states have different rules. Also look into the local regulations.

· A designated adult should supervise all fireworks, and children should not handle them.

· Use fireworks outside in a clear area away from buildings, vehicles and animals.

· Keep a host and water buckets nearby.

· Soak duds and spent fireworks in water before disposing of them in the trash.

· Never consume alcohol before shooting fireworks.

· Light fireworks one at a time.

For more information about Experient Health, contact a benefits consultant or visit the online health insurance quote engine.

Experient Health is a proud company of the Virginia Farm Bureau. Reported by PRWeb 17 hours ago.

Connecture To Present Session On The Next Generation Of Single-Carrier Private Health Insurance Exchanges At AHIP's Institute 2014 Conference

0
0
Connecture To Present Session On The Next Generation Of Single-Carrier Private Health Insurance Exchanges At AHIP's Institute 2014 Conference BROOKFIELD, Wis., June 9, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Connecture, Inc., the leading provider of Web-based information systems used to create health insurance marketplaces, today announced that Christopher Neuharth, the company's vice president of product design and user experience, will... Reported by PR Newswire 17 hours ago.

The List: Top Florida Health Insurance Providers

0
0
A long-standing company ranked first on the South Florida Business Journal’s list of the top Florida health insurance providers. The provider earned the top spot based on its statewide direct premium earned of $3.8 billion. To see which company topped the list, click through the slideshow included with this post. The Florida health insurance providers list includes contact information, statewide market share and number of lives covered. We are currently surveying for the upcoming list of the… Reported by bizjournals 17 hours ago.

Dr. Dean's Faulty Diagnosis

0
0
I was disappointed to see Howard Dean's recent blog post criticizing a vital but largely unknown federal drug discount program called 340B. Dean may be a doctor and a gifted former governor, but it's clear he is spending more time on K Street with his drug industry clients these days than treating patients.

Big Pharma has been feeding Governor Dean industry-funded studies that (surprise surprise) say 340B should be scaled back because it is too big and may not be directly benefiting patients. The truth is that the program represents just 2 percent of the $329 billion U.S. pharmaceutical market and enables hospitals and clinics to carry out their mission to serve all patients regardless of their ability to pay.

Congress created 340B more than 20 years ago to help hospitals, community health centers and other federally funded clinics better serve their low-income patients. It requires drug companies to sell discounted medications to healthcare providers with high percentages of Medicaid, disabled and low-income seniors. The program has been so successful that it was expanded to children's hospitals when George W. Bush was president and to rural hospitals under the Affordable Care Act. The Obama administration has also made it easier for patients to receive medications closer to home by allowing hospitals and community health centers to partner with retail and community pharmacies.

Hospitals pass on the savings through discounted or free medications to uninsured or underinsured patients or by opening up clinics that, for example, take care of HIV-positive or diabetic patients.

The program improves lives for tens of thousands of underserved Americans every day.

Take the example of a 57-year-old Kentucky man with lung cancer who lost his job as a minister and his health insurance when he could no longer work. His three cancer drugs cost more than his monthly Social Security benefit of $680. Jewish Hospital in Louisville, which has been in 340B since 2005, got this patient the chemotherapy he needed at a price his family could afford. Two of his meds were free; a third cost him $40 a month (vs. $286 from a large big box chain).

Or consider Utah Valley Regional Medical Center in Provo, Utah, which uses 340B savings to run a clinic for preemies susceptible to a potentially life-threatening lung disease caused by a virus. It can be treated with an expensive drug (roughly $2,000 to $3,000 per dose) that must be taken for several months during the cold/flu season. On average, seven to eight babies come through the clinic per week. The clinic covers all costs for families without insurance. Those with insurance only pay their normal copay.

Dean says hospitals that get 340B drug discounts aren't providing enough charity care in return. This is highly misleading and misses the point. The level of charity care provided by a hospital is not the metric Congress devised for eligibility in the 340B program. Rather, a hospital must serve a very high percentage of poor patients to qualify. These hospitals take enormous losses to treat these patients. Charity care does not adequately track the uncompensated losses and bad debt hospitals must incur in their missions to treat all patients and for that reason the government chose not to make it the benchmark for entry.

And now, here's some important context. Providers eligible for 340B discounts buy $7 billion worth of drugs through the program annually. You'll be interested to know that pharmaceutical companies spend $27 billion just on direct marketing and advertising every year. That's a whole lot of Viagra and Cialis ads.

Is it too much to ask highly profitable multi-national companies to shoulder some of the burden of treating our most vulnerable patients? If the pharmaceutical industry is successful in shrinking or killing 340B, it would have a devastating impact on uninsured, underinsured and other vulnerable patients across America.

We are in a new era of healthcare - 340B is part of the solution, not the problem.

Ted Slafsky is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Safety Net Hospitals for Pharmaceutical Access, an organization of over 1000 hospitals and health systems that participate in the 340B program. Reported by Huffington Post 16 hours ago.

Fitch Affirms Blue Cross of Idaho's IFS at 'A-'

0
0
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Fitch Ratings has affirmed Blue Cross of Idaho Health Service, Inc.'s (BCID) 'A-' Insurer Financial Strength (IFS) rating. The Rating Outlook is Stable. KEY RATING DRIVERS Fitch's rating on BCID reflects the company's excellent competitive position in the Idaho health insurance market, strong risk adjusted capitalization, solid balance sheet, and steady operating performance. The rating also reflects the company's limited geographic diversification, small scale relati Reported by Business Wire 16 hours ago.

The Ultimate Guide to Shutting Down Conservative Anti-Piketty Hysteria

0
0
Thomas Piketty's wildly popular new book, "Capital in the 21st Century," has been subject to more think pieces than the final episode of "Breaking Bad." Progressives are celebrating the book -- and its unexpected popularity -- as an important turning point in the fight against global wealth inequality. This, of course, means that conservatives have gonecompletely ballistic.

Rush Limbaugh, for example, has come out guns a-blazing: "Some French socialist, Marxist, communist economist has published a book, and the left in this country is having orgasms over it," he exclaimed during a recent broadcast.

When the right drops the C-bomb, the M-bomb and S-bomb all at once, you can be certain a book is having an impact. And "Capital" may well be the "General Theory" of the first half of the 21st century, redefining the way we think about capitalism, democracy and equality.

This, of course, means that the right-wing attacks have only just begun. That in mind, here is a handy guide to navigating the more absurd responses:

*Claim: Piketty is a dirty Marxist*

There are two Marxes. One, a scholar of capitalism of repute, put forward testable hypotheses, some of which you may accept, some of which you may reject. The other is a conservative boogeyman, the human representation of all they find evil. If they dislike something, it must be Marxist.

James Pethokoukis, a formidable writer, went full hack for his National Review review,
Thanks to Piketty, the Left is now having a "Galaxy Quest" moment. All that stuff their Marxist economics professors taught them about the "inherent contradictions" of capitalism and about history's being on the side of the planners -- all the theories that the apparent victory of market capitalism in the last decades of the 20th century seemed to invalidate -- well, it's all true after all.
*How to respond: *Most times someone drops the M-Bomb, he is intending to be provocative. With enough effort, you can make almost anything Marxist. While Marxists don't agree on everything, and the term is very nebulous (Marx once said he wouldn't describe himself as a Marxist), there are some pretty established rules for determining if someone is, indeed, a Marxist. First, he generally doesn't write things like:
· "Marxist analysis emphasized the falling rate of profit -- a historical prediction that turned out to be quite wrong" ("Capital in the 21st Century," page 52)· "Marx usually adopted a fairly anecdotal and unsystematic approach". ("Capital in the 21st Century," page 229)· "Marx evidently wrote in great political fervor, which at times lead him to issue hasty pronouncements from which it is difficult to escape. That is why economic theory needs to be rooted in historical sources ..." ("Capital in the 21st Century," page  10)· "... Marx totally neglected the possibility of durable technological progress and steadily increasing productivity." ("Capital in the 21st Century," page  10)

These are not the words of a Marxist, but rather a reasonable scholar, investigating the truth of the claims written by the greatest political economist who ever lived. The fact that Piketty abstains from the vitriol and misrepresentation that typify most writing on Marx are to his credit.

Piketty certainly does argue that capitalism will not inevitably reduce inequality, as economist Simon Kuznets had famously claimed. As to whether capital will accumulate without end, as Marx believed, he is more nuanced.

Piketty argues that capital will accumulate in the hands of the few when growth is slower than the rate of return on capital and dis-accumulate if not (This is the now famous "r>g" formula). As growth slows, companies can replace workers with machines (written by economists as "substitution between capital and labor"), but only if there is a high elasticity of capital to labor (higher elasticity means easier replacement). This means that the share of income going to the owners of capital will rise, and the distribution of that capital will become more unequal.

Piketty does not hold to a labor theory of value, he does not believe that capitalism is founded on the exploitation of the proletariat, and he does not believe the system will inevitably collapse on its own contradictions. But critics who call Piketty a Marxist don't actually mean, "Piketty subscribes to a collection of propositions generally accepted by Marxists"; they mean it as a verbal grenade. Step over it and move to more substantive criticisms.

*Claim: The social safety net has already solved the problem*

In order to somewhat compensate workers for voluntary unemployment and the ludicrously low wages that "markets" pay them, modern societies have developed transfer systems, or social safety nets of various levels of robustness, to bolster the incomes of low-wage workers. Some conservatives argue that these transfers have solved the inequality problem.

Scott Winship, the lovable but irksome economist dedicated to upsetting the inequality consensus, writes in Forbes:
Most importantly, in the United States, most public transfer income is omitted from tax returns. That includes not just means-tested programs for poor families and unemployment benefits, but Social Security. Many retirees in the Piketty-Saez data have tiny incomes because their main source of sustenance is rendered invisible in the data.
*How to respond: *There's not enough room to give his data claims a full airing. For our purposes, it suffices to say that, while America does have a transfer system, it's far less robust than that of other developed nations. (See chart below, from Lane Kenworthy.)

Government revenues are far lower in the U.S. than in other countries, making redistribution more difficult, and thus our safety net is far more frail. (See chart below, from Sean McElwee.)

Far more interesting is what would happen if conservatives made this their line. After all, if transfers are what is preventing inequality from skyrocketing then the rising share of pre-transfer income accruing to the wealthy capital owners means we need more robust transfer system. Because few, if any, thinkers on the right have argued for a stronger transfer system (and are, in fact, attempting to violate it), they must accept the logical conclusion: Their policies will set off skyrocketing inequality (or, more likely: They don't give a shit).

*Claim: Inequality isn't a problem because look at consumption!*

There are lots of ways to look at inequality. You could look at income inequality by examining how much a person takes home every year from their labor, income from assets and transfers. You could also look at wealth inequality by figuring out how many assets they own, in the form of stocks, bonds, property, and subtract from it their debts. Or you could look at how much they are able to consume.

Some conservative economists argue that an increase in income inequality has not been mirrored by an increase in consumption inequality because the wealthy save or invest their income. Kevin Hassett, a former Romney economic adviser, illustrates this point, arguing:
From 2000 to 2010, consumption has climbed 14% for individuals in the bottom fifth of households, 6% for individuals in the middle fifth, and 14.3% for individuals in the top fifth when we account for changes in U.S. population and the size of households. This despite the dire economy at the end of the decade.
Although he initially made this argument against Piketty in 2012, he has revived it recently in a lecture on the subject.

*How to respond: *In large part, this is a common trope on the right -- the "but they have cellphones!" argument. The empirical literature on this subject is still very much in flux, and there is not a consensus. Some recent studies find that consumption inequality has increased with income inequality. But even if we except the consumption inequality argument, conservatives have some explaining to do. After all, if income inequality has been rising while consumption inequality has stayed the same, where is the spending coming from? Debt. Which means that wealth inequality is increasing, as the rich save more and the poor fall further into debt. Research released this week by Amy Traub of Demos finds that the recent increase in credit card debt hasn't been driven by profligate spending, but unemployment, children, the declining value of homes and lack of health insurance. Recent research by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman show how the bottom 90 percent simply haven't been able to save their incomes and thereby build wealth. (See chart below.)

*Claim: We need lazy rich people*

Tyler Cowen is one of the more honest of Piketty's critics, and there is certainly a lot to like in his review. However, this section is a head-scratcher:
Piketty fears the stasis and sluggishness of the rentier, but what might appear to be static blocks of wealth have done a great deal to boost dynamic productivity. Piketty's own book was published by the Belknap Press imprint of Harvard University Press, which received its initial funding in the form of a 1949 bequest from Waldron Phoenix Belknap, Jr., an architect and art historian who inherited a good deal of money from his father, a vice president of Bankers Trust... consider Piketty's native France, where the scores of artists who relied on bequests or family support to further their careers included painters such as Corot, Delacroix, Courbet, Manet, Degas, Cézanne, Monet, and Toulouse-Lautrec and writers such as Baudelaire, Flaubert, Verlaine, and Proust, among others.
*How to respond: *It's very true that in the past, many artists, writers and thinkers benefited from familial wealth (or rich benefactors). This, however, is not to be celebrated! It means that marginalized people are frequently removed from mainstream discussion. It's also a dreadful defense of inequality. As theologian Reinhold Niebuhr writes,"The fact that culture requires leisure, is however, hardly a sufficient justification for the maintenance of a leisured class. For every artist which the aristocracy has produced, and for every two patrons of the arts, it has supported a thousand wastrels."

Poverty and oppression can also create other powerful types of art, from boheim to the blues. More important, there are far better ways to fund the arts than throwing money at rich families and hoping they cook up something nice. For instance, the National Endowment for the Arts has funded arts education, dance, design, folk and traditional arts, literature, local arts agencies, media arts, museums, music, musical theater, opera, theater and visual arts. In the aftermath of the Great Depression the Works Progress Administration had an arm devoted to funding the arts that supported Jackson Pollock, William Gropper, Willem de Kooning, Leon Bibel and Ben Shahn. The CIA has even gotten into the game.

As Niebuhr notes, "An intelligent society will know how to subsidize those who possess peculiar gifts ... and will not permit a leisured class to justify itself by producing an occasional creative genius among a multitude of incompetents." It's a wonder that conservatives want the wealthy financing art and philosophy -- Marx, after all, would have died of penury without the beneficence of the wealthy Engels. Given that his economist friends have been impressed by Piketty's cultural depth because of his ability to cite Jane Austen, I wouldn't put much weight on their cultural defense of privilege.

*Claim: Piketty is French, and we saved their asses in World War II*

This is true. You've lost the debate.

Originally published on Salon. Reported by Huffington Post 15 hours ago.
Viewing all 22794 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images