• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Another fine mess
    wynne05 on Another fine mess
    centaur on Another fine mess
    MAG on Another fine mess
    centaur on Ruth Bader Ginsburg
    riverdaughter on Another fine mess
    riverdaughter on Another fine mess
    William on Another fine mess
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Another fine mess
    Niles on Another fine mess
    Bes on Ruth Bader Ginsburg
    Bes on Ruth Bader Ginsburg
    jmac on Another fine mess
    Ivory Bill Woodpecke… on Another fine mess
    William on Another fine mess
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    June 2011
    S M T W T F S
     1234
    567891011
    12131415161718
    19202122232425
    2627282930  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Death
      First: her refusal to resign when she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in 2009 (on top of already being old) when Obama could have replaced her has caused an entirely avoidable crisis. She was selfish, put herself first and this is the consequence. Second: Though far better than anyone Trump will nominate she was on […]
  • Top Posts

Or…

Paul Krugman had a recent post about the McKinsey study that purports to show that up to 30% of employers are planning to drop health insurance coverage due to the Affordable Care Act. The Obama administration and other Democrats seem to be in full denial mode, demanding that McKinsey show its data because it can’t *possibly* be true. Right? RIGHT?!

In some respects, this reaction is reminiscent of the Republicans who were adamant that Democrats take it back about Republicans trying to destroy Medicare in franked mailings and ads.

I’m of the “let’s wait and see the data” variety before I jump on the Democratic bandwagon. Paul’s a pretty smart guy but he may be jumping the gun here. Just because McKinsey isn’t revealing their data doesn’t mean their conclusions aren’t true. You don’t have to be a Republican to consider the possibility that the conclusions are valid.

Here’s just one possible scenario that may explain why McKinsey is holding out. The firms they are consulting for may be planning to layoff a lot of people and hire them back as contractors. If they do that, the employee is responsible for paying health insurance, not the company who is going through a middle man to add staff. Now, your consultants would know about this plan. Presumably, they were the knuckleheads that advised it in the first place. But you don’t want the employees to know what’s coming. I mean, have you *been* in a building that’s going through layoffs?? The people who aren’t wandering around like zombies are busily updating their CVs and contacting their network. No one gets any work done. (well, *I* did but I see now that I was crazy for all the good it did me) It’s a fricking disaster area. And let’s not even talk about the cut throat behavior of people back stabbing each other to make sure they secure the positions that are left. It’s an ugly bloodbath and no one comes out looking good.

So, maybe the reason that McKinsey isn’t talking is because it has to respect the confidentiality of its clients. In this business environment, the bottom line is the bottom line. Companies will do what they have to in order to appease the shareholders and right now, a lot of companies are desperate for cash and can’t cut much more without affecting productivity any more than they have. They still need the people. They just don’t want to have to compensate them so well. If that means laying off and hiring contractors without the burden of health insurance, well, the new Affordable Care Act gives them a great opportunity to do it. They just need to keep everyone working until then.

Of course, this is just a hypothesis. But it could explain the silence on McKinsey’s part. You don’t want to be the bearer of bad news that there is going to be a lot more unemployment soon and a lot more people without health insurance.

I’ll wait to be proven wrong.

5 Responses

  1. Just Deterrence, that’s all. Interpreting the hypocrisy of this shit will get us nowhere.

  2. of course they won’t tell folks what’s coming down the pike…we might protest if not ambushed with this and their other plans ….the average American is seen by the powers that be like we are migrant workers….that’s how they see us, it’s the model , that’s what we can expect from them…. No services, work super cheap ,without rights and be invisible when not needed.

    ugh

  3. The Obama administration … demanding that McKinsey show its data because it can’t *possibly* be true.

    HA HA HA!!! The Obama admin is demanding that other people produce documentary evidence? Maybe they should hire Trump to get on McKinsey to produce the data — I hear he can get results

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: