Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Hi, everybody. My name is Stefan Molyneux. I'm the host of Freedomain Radio. This is
the Truth About Obamacare. Oh, my goodness, what a challenging roll out this has been
as we would say in the IT world. So, I've attempted to go out and get just the fact
so that you can make an informed decision about the laws and the implementation and
come to your own conclusions about what is going.
So, as you probably know, President Obama's Affordable Healthcare Act requires that almost
all Americans carry health insurance or face a fine starting in 2014. Now, this law was
signed in to effect in March of 2010 which basically means that the government has had
about three and a half years to create and test the Obamacare website.
As you probably heard it's been about as catastrophic roll out as you can imagine in the IT world.
I actually was an IT executive entrepreneur, Chief Technical Officer for about 15 years
and designed, coded, built, marketed and sold some pretty complex computer systems to a
variety of public and private sectors in to this. I know a little bit about best practices
and how things should be rolling out and we will see how this compares to best practices,
this roll out of the Obamacare website. Now, they have spent 500 to 600 million dollars.
They are refusing to release list and names of all of the companies although some of the
people know abut have also been companies that have donated a lot of money to the Obama
administration raising questions of possible cronyism. And figures released recently have
suggested that the total cost of this website could top a billion dollars and that of course
is really challenging. The idea that is been talked about now a couple of weeks after the
roll out is that you got to basically going to load up a cannon full of nerds and fire
it at the website. This is not going to work. A website of this complexity at this site
with this level of user requirements is enormously complicated. Probably millions of lines of
code and database triggers all interacting together. You change one thing over here.
It might change something the other end of the application. So, it's going to take people
months even to get up to speed on what is being done. This site assuming it doesn't
need to be completely rewritten which is probably the most likely thing that's going to happen
will not be functional in any significant way for I would imagine 8 to 12 months would
be a minimum. So, this idea, you know, we're working around the clock to fix the problem
is not...is not valid. Now, contractors assured the congressional
committee on September 10th that they and their computer systems and the entire online
federal health care marketplace was ready to enroll millions of Americans. Now, there
were some quality managers who said this is not ready for primetime yet. They would largely
shut it down. One of the things that the contractors are complaining about is what's called scope
creep which is when the requirements for the package or the program changed after significant
portions of it have been implemented which is kind of like adjusting the wings of an
airplane mechanically while the plane is taking off as opposed to doing it in the hanger beforehand
is 10 ten times more challenging. One of the things that happened right before
the system has rolled out was that the government suddenly said, "No, no, no. We had originally
designed it so that people could browse the prices of these health care plans without
requiring registration." Then they changed it to say, "No, no, no. People must now register
before they can see any prices." Now really, come one. What kind of sense is this really
make? You can browse Amazon. You can browse eBay. You can ever browse YouTube without
registering because they want you to see what you're going in for before you register. The
only conceivable reason that I can imagine that you would suddenly require registration
before people could see the prices is you really don't want people to see the prices
for reasons that we'll get in to in a moment. All right, let's see what was promised versus
what was delivered. While the ACA was making its way through the
labyrinth of Congress in 2009 and 2010, President Obama famously promised the American people
over and over again that if you like your health care plan, you can keep it. Let's hear
a quote from one rally in July 2009. "Let me be exactly clear about what health care
reform means to you. First of all if you've got health insurance, you like your doctors,
you like your plan, you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan. Nobody is talking
about taking that away from you." But the president's promise is turning out
to be tragically false for millions of Americans. Health care policies are being canceled all
over the country because these policies don't meet the requirements of the Affordable Care
Act. According to health policy expert Bob Laszewski, approximately 16 million Americans
will lose their current plans because of Obamacare. For months, we've heard about Obama's trillions
in health care subsidies that are going to eliminate or reduce rate shock for the millions
of uninsured Americans because if you're uninsured, you're uninsured for probably a very good
reason which we'll get in to in just a moment. And so, if you suddenly have to sign up for
health care insurance, maybe you can afford it, maybe you've got your money committed
to other things so there's going to be a lots of subsidies from the government. Unfortunately,
it's not turning out to be true. If you shop for coverage on your own, you're likely to
see your rates go up, even after accounting for the impact of pre-existing conditions,
even after accounting for the impact of subsidies. Now, let's just take a moment to talk about
pre-existing conditions. It's really essential. If you want to understand what's going wrong
with the American health care industry, one of the key things you need to understand is
the problem of pre-existing conditions. Can you imagine calling up an insurance company
and saying, "I need fire insurance like now," and they say, "Why?" "Because my house is
burning down, man. I need it now." And they'd say, "Well, you can't buy it now because your
house is burning down." The whole point is you have to buy it beforehand when you don't
know that you're house is burning down. Well, the government has forbidden American
health care insurance companies from rejecting claimants who have pre-existing conditions
for years. This has caused huge problems. If you wait until you have cancer before applying
for health care insurance, there's no possible way that your health care premiums can cover
the cost of your cancer treatment. Therefore, all the other people in the plan have to pay
for your health care treatments because you didn't pay before. And what that means is
that young and healthy people are going to be disproportioned in charge higher rates
to pay for all the people who waited until they got sick before applying for health care
insurance. This is a huge and -- a huge problem which is only increasing under Obamacare.
Before Obamacare was passed, Obama said, "Here is a guarantee that I've made. If you've got
a doctor that you like, you will be able to keep your doctor." However, in July 2013,
the Obama administration said that people "may" be able to keep their doctor. That's
quite an important change. I mean imagine you get on the plane. You're going to Newark
and say, "We're going to Newark. And you get on the plane. You're in the middle of the
air and say, "We 'may' be going to Newark." Now, that's kind of a changed, right? This
is even more important than that. In February 2008, Obama said, "We are going
to work with you to lower your premiums by $2,500. We will not wait 20 years from now
to do it or 10 years from now to do it. We will do it by the end of my first term as
president. Lower your premiums by $2,500." However, by the time that Obama's first term
was over, family premiums had gotten bigger, not smaller. The increase was over $3,000
per family. This is one thing if you don't quite lower
the premiums as much as you promise maybe he'd only got to $2,000 lower. But $3,000
higher, that is quite a change. "Hey, I won $3,000 in the lottery. Go to cash it in."
"Hey, I owe the lottery $3,000. How did that happened?" It's much more important than that.
Based on a Manhattan Institute analysis of the HHS numbers of Obamacare will increase
underlying insurance rates for younger men by an average of 97 to 99 percent, and for
younger women by an average of 55 to 62 percent. In North Carolina, well, I'm afraid you are
quite host. Individual-market rates triple for women and quadruple for men.
Under Obamacare, rates for men and women are the same which has the net effect of disproportionately
increasing rates for men, who generally paid less under the old system. When you say to
insurance companies you cannot now discriminate on gender, what you're saying is that men
must subsidize women particularly under the age of 40, women use a much higher proportion
of health care than men for a variety of intricate plumbing which strengthens me and also because
of having children and all that kind of stuff. So, there is a massive subsidy from men to
women when you're no longer allowed to distribute -- to discriminate based on gender.
Now, nearly two-thirds of the uninsured in America are under the age of 40. And of course
they're avoiding insurance because it's disproportionately higher because they have to pay for all the
other people who waited till they got sick before getting healthcare. These young and
healthy people are essential to Obamacare; unless you are a young and healthy person
willing to pay massive multiples of what your health care insurance actually would cost
in the free market, unless you're willing to subsidize women, if you're -- old people,
people who waited till they were sick before getting health care. If you're not willing
to do that, the entire system will fall apart financially which means the debt will be passed
along to the future. Let's look at some of these facts and you
can pause this and remember the sources or area in the lower bar.
A 27-year-old man, this is Affordable Care Acts Bronze premiums versus the premiums available
before this for a 27-year-old man, adjusted for pre-existing conditions so percent increase
in price. So, the dark red are over 200 percent increases and then 100 to 200 you can sort
of see this. The blue are low increases or decreases and as you can see really not a
lot of blue in this. So, for young people, for young men, it's pretty catastrophic.
Let's look at this for 27-year-old -- for a 27-year-old woman. One or two more blue,
a little bit less dark red but again, increases in general. 40-yeard-old man, massive increases
of course and there's only one state where you can get a decrease. This is a pretty catastrophic
for a 40-year-old woman. Again, slightly better in a few states for decreases but most people
are going to see a massive increase and this of course is after the administration promised
everyone in the lead after the bill. They promised everyone that the price was going
to go down. This is a very suspicious promise to make for reasons of Math and Economics
but the promise was made and this is the result. So, the U.S. individual health insurance market
currently totals about 19 million people. Because the Obama administration's regulation
on grandfathering existing plans were so stringent about 85 percent of these or about 16 million
are not grandfathered and must comply with Obamacare at their next renewal. This is very
significant. You will not be able to keep your existing plan for the vast majority of
Americans. And the Obamacare rules are very complex.
So for example, if you had an individual plan in March of 2010 when the law was passed and
you only increased the deductible from $1,000 to $1,500 in the year since, your plan has
lost its grandfather status and it will no longer be available to you when it would have
renewed in 2014. The moment you touch your plan, it is no longer grandfathered in.
16 million people are now receiving letters. I mean not all 16 at the same time but they're
receiving letters from the carriers saying they are losing their current coverage and
must re-enroll in order to avoid a break in coverage and comply with the new health care
law's benefit mandates - the vast majority by January the 1st. And most of the people
are going to see some very significant rate increases because the health care law is covering
a lot of people who are quite ill. Now, these people should get health care. I'm a big fan
of sick people getting health care but the reality is that it is going to raise cost
for everyone particularly people who aren't yet sick. z
So, Kaiser Health News recently called up a few insurers around the country and found
that hundreds of thousands of Americans have already received cancellation notices for
their existing policies. Quote, "The cancellation notices which began arriving in August, have
shocked many consumers in light of President Barack Obama's promise that people could keep
their plans if they like them," according to representatives and reporters.
So, here is a quote, "Florida Blue, for example, is terminating about 300,000 policies, about
80% of its individual policies in the state. Kaiser Permanente in California has sent notices
to 160,000 people -- about half of its individual business in the state. Insurer Highmark in
Pittsburgh is dropping about 20 percent of its individual market customers, while Independence
Blue Cross, the major insurer in Philadelphia, is dropping about 45 percent; this is according
to the Kaiser report. "Blue Shield of California sent roughly 119,000
cancellation notices out to mid-September, about 60 percent of its individual business.
About two-thirds of those policyholders will see rate increases in their new policies."
This would be completely illegal in the private sector to make commitments and promises to
customers and then have the exact opposite happen.
So, Kathy Kristof of CBS MoneyWatch relates her own experience of seeing a 67 percent
spike in her premiums, for a worse policy than she had before. So, this is what she
said. She said, "The promise that you could keep your old policy if you liked has proved
illusory. My insurer, Kaiser Permanente, informed me in a glossy booklet that "At midnight on
December 31st..." ooh, doesn't it sound kind of chilly? Sounds like the beginning of a
horror movie. I guess it is. "At midnight on December 31st we will discontinue your
current plan because it will not meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act."
"My premium, the letter added, would go from $209 a month to $348, a 66.5 percent increase
that will cost almost $1,700 annually. What made my plan too substandard to survive under
Obamacare? Well, it did not provide maternity benefits. I'm 53 years old. I figure pregnancy
would require an act of God. Incidentally, maternity benefits will be covered on men's
policies too." "Let's hope medical science comes a long way
so you guys can use those benefits. My policy also did not cover substance abuse treatments
or psychiatric care." Okay, so when the government gets involved
-- very briefly, when the government gets involved in policies in other words when the
government gets to dictate what has to be covered in health care plans, then everybody
who's got requirements for health care once everyone else to subsidize their health care.
It's natural. I mean it's human nature. So, women want other people to subsidize the cost
of maternity benefits and so on, right? Of course they do because if everyone else pays
it, then you pay less but to requiring 70-year old men to cover maternity benefits, of course,
it's ridiculous. It's unfair. It's unjust and it's kind of predatory.
And also people who have more obscure ailments want those ailments to be forced on everyone
else so everyone else has to pay for those ailments and they have to pay proportionately
less. And this is one of the reasons why these health care plans have to cover more and more
stuff to the point where they just become ridiculously expensive and this is another
reason why health care is so expensive in the United States.
She continues to say, "Meanwhile, the things that mattered to me -- that I would be able
to limit my out-of-pocket costs if I had a catastrophic ailment - got worse under my
new Obamacare policy. My policy, which is always paid 100 percent of the cost of annual
check-ups, had a $5,000 annual deductible for sick visits and hospital stays." And this
you see quite continuously in the Obamacare mandates that you have enormously high deductibles.
Now the reality is of course, if you couldn't afford health care having hugely high deductible
doesn't really help you that much because you can't afford the deductible. "Once I paid
that $5,000..." she continues, "...the plan would pay 100% of any additional cost. That
protected me from economic devastation in the event of a catastrophic illness, such
as cancer." Kaiser's Obamacare policy has a $4,500 deductible
she says but then covers only 40 percent of medical costs for office visits, hospital
stays and drugs. Out-of-pocket expenses aren't capped until the policyholder pays $6,350
annually. Sure, that's only another $1,350 she says, "But it adds to the additional $1,700
almost that I'm paying in premiums, making my personal cost for Obamacare add to $3,018
annually. This, by the way, is the bare-bones policy under Obamacare -- the Bronze plan.
Premiums for plans that offer lower deductibles and premiums would cost almost twice as much,
according to the Kaiser booklet." The law is incomprehensible. The law cannot
possibly be understood by any individual or even any group of individuals. So, after the
law was passed and the law was highly complex in its nature when it was passed, the regulations
that Obama has added to Obamacare after he signed it are 11 million words long. That's
30 times as many words as the actual Obamacare law that Obama signed in March 2010 contained.
Now, because Obama added these 11 million words without approval from Congress, his
actions are actually illegal and there's a lot of illegality in Obamacare which we'll
get to in a few minutes. Exemptions, now, after Obamacare was passed, the unions that
supported its passage requested and received special exemptions from the law. So, within
months after Obamacare was passed, Obama gave some organizations an exemption from some
of the requirements of Obamacare. As time went on, more than 1,300 organizations received
these exemptions. Now, these exemptions are illegal for two
reasons. Number one, Obama granted these exemptions without approval from Congress. Congress passed
the law, Congress is responsible for the law and the law cannot be modified without Congressional
approval but Obama bypassed Congress and simply granted extensions probably written in lipstick
on the back of a napkin. And also the Constitution requires the law to treat everyone the same.
And so, granting exemptions from Obamacare is anti-constitutional. It's unconstitutional.
To add to the tasty frappe of political hypocrisy, after Obamacare was passed, politicians who
voted for it asked for special exemptions for their own districts. So, Obamacare is
partly paid for by a medical device tax. Now, in case you are confused about this, medical
devices don't in fact pay tax. Therefore, the consumers will pay that tax. It is a tax
on consumers. All taxes on objects are taxes on consumers just like all taxes on corporations
are taxes on employees. So, some medical device manufacturers have
announced plans to layoff employees, including Welch Allyn (275 planned layoffs), Stryker
(over 1,100 planned layoffs), and Medtronic (1,000 planned layoffs).
In December 12 -- sorry, in December 2012, Al Franken, Elizabeth Warren, John Kerry,
and 15 other Democrats who supported the passage of Obamacare wrote a letter to Harry Reid,
asking him to delay the tax on medical devices, claiming that the tax would hurt job creation
in their districts, other districts apparently be damned.
Politicians who voted for Obamacare wanted an additional exemption for themselves and
their staff after it was passed. In 2013, members of Congress and their staff complained
that Obamacare was going to cost them a lot of money, and said that this would likely
cause a brain drain among their staff because it's too expensive to implement for Congress
because remember, Congress doesn't have that much money, right?
In response to this, Obama made changes to Obamacare so that these things would not happen.
However, Obama's actions were illegal, because he made these changes without Congress voting
on them first because of course, you would not want the public spectacle of Congress
voting to exempt itself from a law that Congress passed on everyone else. My good friends in
Massachusetts -- people of Massachusetts were huge Obama's -- sorry, huge supporters of
both Obamacare and President Obama voting from, of course, twice in both elections.
But even they eventually ended up asking for their own special exemption from Obamacare.
And in August 2013, Obama gave an Obamacare waiver to an entire state, the state of Massachusetts
who had voted for him and -- through polls was reported to enthusiastically support Obamacare
but for everybody else. The creation and implementation of the act has been shrouded in near Soviet
levels of secrecy. So, although Obama had made a campaign promise repeatedly to have
all of the health care reform negotiations broadcast on C-SPAN, he broke that promise
after he was elected. The secrecy of the negotiations was so strong
that U.S. Congresswoman and speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously said, "We have
to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." Hmm, I feel my trust flower
blooming in my heart. Obama used Obamacare to illegally give the IRS additional powers
without approval from Congress. In May 2013, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen
Sebelius "solicited" donations from health insurers. You know, when someone high up in
the government comes and asks you for a donation, you'll probably get few more people listening
with a little bit more attention than if somebody from the United Way comes by. So, she solicited
donations from health insurers to help pay for Obamacare. This solicitation is in fact
illegal. I will give you four guesses as to whether she has faced any negative repercussions
from this. Obamacare has raised the interest rate on
student loans from 5.3 percent to 6.8 percent. The money of course is used to fund Obamacare.
In June 2013, it was reported that Obama had hired 16,500 new IRS agents to run Obamacare.
But I guess some of the people who were laid off from medical device from [0:23:17] [Phonetic]
could re-apply as IRS agents so that could work. In March 2011, 15 IRS agents illegally
seized the medical records of 10 million people without a warrant. Obama refused to fire or
prosecute any of them because again, you don't want publicity for this kind of stuff. And
the IRS agents who run Obamacare enthusiastically do not want to participate in it.
In August 2013, it was reported that less than 3 percent of federal employees wanted
to participate in Obamacare. And now, federal employees rarely see a government program
that they don't like but I guess the plan is aligned and this is one they found that
they did not like. Now, this is very important. In August 2013, it was reported that the Obama
administration would not be doing background checks on Obamacare "navigators". So, the
"navigators" are people that you can call to help step you through the process of applying
for the health care because apparently the website and the calling line aren't enough.
Now, these "navigators" would have access to people's personal, private, and financial
information. Now, on the website recently they just tested this in Illinois, on the
website in Illinois and in other places, you can click on a hyperlink that says, "Here
are all of the navigators available to you for help with your information with your website
and so on with your application." Now, a reporter found that of the hundreds of people, a hundreds
of groups, organizations and people who were listed as navigators, there was a little note
at the bottom that said, "These people have not all been approved."
So, he called up the administration and said, "Well, wait a minute. What does that mean?
Does that mean these are just people who have applied?"
"Am I going to be handing up personal financial information to people who have only applied
to be these navigators?" And they would not give him an answer. So, be very careful about
that. All right, so let's dig up. This is the preparation
for the website. The administration never tested the complete user experience of the
federal exchanges at all before the system launched. According to a Business Week source,
the federal exchange system quote "went live without attempts to replicate a customer's
complete experience". Now, they did run particular separate tests on various modules and they
failed. The Washington Post reported that a trial run intended to see whether the system
could handle large numbers of simultaneous users crashed when just a few hundred simulated
users were logged in. The other that's happened is the website downloads
a bunch of codes, your local computer stores cookies and so on and this is a huge problem
because whenever you change the code on the server, the program locally checks with the
code on the local computer so you have to go and clear your cash and clear your cookies
and so on. And I don't know if the people think that means flushing money and cookies
down the toilet but it's really hard to maintain a site when the information is stored locally.
Of course, when you delete the local information, then the local computer has to go back to
the server to get more data and more code thus slowing down the experience as well.
So, it's really bad coding practices for anything but the most robustly tested system and this
is why it's going to be really tough to fix. The exchange system was supposed to interface
seamlessly with state-run Medicaid programs that functionality which was already delayed
until November the 1st has now been further delayed and they basically say, "We have no
idea when it will be ready." So, on September 26 very shortly before the roll out, President
Obama described how easy it would be to shop for health insurance when new health exchanges
opened across the nation just one week later. "There's been a lot of things said, a lot
of misinformation, a lot of confusion," he said. His speech was intended to help set
the record straight. "Starting on Tuesday," he said, "Every American
can visit HealthCare.gov to find out what's called the insurance marketplace for your
state." From there, he said, the process of buying insurance would be real simple. I'm
sure he used the word folks about 90 times as well. "It's a website where you can compare
and purchase affordable health insurance plans, side-by-side, the same way you shop for a
plane ticket on kayak -- same way you shop for a TV on Amazon. You just go on and you
start looking and here are all the options." If you've ever tried to buy insurance on your
own, he said, "I promise you this is a lot easier."
Now, this is September 26, less than a week before the exchanges were set to open and
no test had been performed on whether a user could successfully navigate it. No test had
been performed -- successful test had been performed on more than a few hundred people
using it without it failing which I guess leads to two questions. Number one, did the
president know that this was the status of the project? If so, then he was lying. If
he didn't know, then is he really that confident to run this kind of stuff? Well, I will let
you be the judge. So, let's talk about in terms of cost. Well,
before Obamacare was passed, Obama promised, "I will not sign a plan that adds one dime
to our deficits -- either now or in the future. And to prove that I'm serious, there will
be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts
if the savings we promised don't materialize." Of course, after Obama signed it, the Washington
Post reported...reported that it would add more than $340 billion to the budget deficit
over the next decade. In March 2012, the Congressional Budget Office
said that over the next decade, Obamacare would cost twice as much as what Obama had
promised. In May 2013, it was reported that Obamacare's program for high risk patients
was more expensive than he promised. And Obamacare includes a 40 percent tax on so-called "Cadillac"
insurance plans. In other words, insurance plans that have low deductibles and co-pays.
In August 2013, unions that supported the passage of Obamacare complained about this
tax. The pricing is very important. Really pricing
is the essence of what's being offered through this plan and the pricing is often incorrect.
So, HealthCare.gov lumps people only into two broad categories: "49 or under" and "50
and older." Now, prices for everyone in the 49-or-under group are based on what a 27-year-old
would pay. Well, that's quite a bit lower than 40. In the 50-or-older group, prices
are based on what a 50-year-old would pay. This of course is outright deception.
So, for 49 or under, they're artificially slanting the cost low by telling you what
a 27-year-old would pay. In 50 or older, they're artificially slanting the cost low by telling
you what a 50-year-old would pay. This is not what you're going to actually get when
you apply for the insurance. So, CBS News ran the numbers for a 48-year-old
in Charlotte, North Carolina who is ineligible for subsidies. According to HealthCare.gov,
she would pay $231 a month, but the actual plan on Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North
Carolina's website costs $360 which is more than 50 percent higher. A 62-year-old in Charlotte
looking for the same basic plan would get a price estimate on the HealthCare.gov website
of $394. The actual price is $634 -- 61% higher. Industry executives that CBS News spoke to
could not believe that the government is providing these estimates, which they said were useless
and could easily mislead consumers. They also said that the website repeatedly states that
actual prices could be lower, but it makes no mention that they could be higher. Astonishingly
deceptive and again, if you try this as a private insurer, terrible things would result.
In September 2013, this is how ridiculous privacy concerns are become in America, it
was reported that Obamacare requires doctors to ask patients personal questions about their
sex lives, and to put their answers into an electronic database. Doctors who avoid doing
this will be penalized. A cardiologist was interviewed and said, "I have no idea why
I would need any of this information and it's frankly offensive to ask my patients."
The Obamacare administration when this was raised as a privacy issue said the patients
who wished to keep their information out of the electronic database should pay in cash.
Obamacare also hits married couples with an annual tax of up to $11,000 for being married
instead of single. Now, of course, in front of the U.S. Supreme Court, the Obama administration
argued that Obamacare is a tax. According to the Obamacare calculator, Obamacare places
an annual tax on married couples for being married instead of single. And it depends
on a wide variety of factors but there is a significant penalty for marriage which is
really not very good. Now, the source code for the Obamacare website
states quote, "You have no reasonable expectation of privacy regarding any communication or
data transiting or stored on this information system. At any time, and for any lawful government
purpose, the government may monitor, intercept, and search and seize any communication or
data transiting or stored in this information system. Any communication or data transiting
or stored on this information system may be disclosed or used for any lawful government
purpose." Now, after the NSA revelations lawful government
purpose means "We have the data, we'll use the data." What's interesting and really quite
deceptive and tragic is that this information is buried in the source code of the website.
In other words, it is not displayed to the end user unless you right click and say view
source and scan through all the garbage to find this. This is literally like printing
the warning labels for cigarettes on the inside of the cigarette paper or writing it in a
prescription bottle on the inside of the bottle in invisible ink and say, "Well, no, no, under
certain lights under a full moon, you can see it." This is really a deceptive as well.
Legitimate shopping websites such as Amazon, you were allowed to browse merchandise without
having to enter your personal information. In order to look at the insurance plans, you
have to put in your name, social security number, and other personal information and
you can call up these "navigators" who may be felons or who knows who and not -- that
did not background check, not validated. This is really catastrophic and health care information
and financial information is incredibly sensitive and personal. People now are going to have
their sex life information broadcasts across the world in this way.
Now, as you probably heard of course, Obamacare only kicks in at 30 hours or more a week.
So, this has encourages employers to switch their employees from full time to part-time.
The New York Times reported that Obamacare "sharply penalizes full-time employment in
favor of part-time employment." In response to the employer mandate for Obamacare, some
restaurants have announced plans to switch some of their employees from full time to
part-time. I actually went to a website and there's links below. You can browse all of
the restaurants, the businesses, the...the universities and so on that have all dropped
their people down to part-time. The 40-hour work a week is kind of the basis and the bedrock
of the middleclass and once you start chipping away that, you create the increasing doughnut
hole where the middleclass used to be that adds a lot to political instability and economic
instability in the West. So, this again is pretty tragic.
Thank you very much for your time and attention during this presentation. My name is Stefan
Molyneux. I'm the host of Freedomain Radio. It's the number one philosophy show on the
internet. I hope that you will check it out at FreedomainRadio.com. You can also help
donate to spread this information fdrurl.com/donate. Please remember to subscribe. We'll be talking
more about this issue as time goes forward. Thank you once again for watching and listening.