• This should cover it

    Rather than reply to comments of the following form, I’ll just say it once. If I post something like “‘A’ happened and there is good evidence it led to ‘B'” I am not saying anything about ‘C’, ‘D’, ‘E’, or ‘F’.

    Less abstractly: Massachusetts passed an insurance mandate for a reason. The evidence is pretty strong that it served the role it was designed for. That’s it. Full stop. Have I said anything about how wonderfully low or atrociously high premiums are in Massachusetts, for example? No. That they may have gone up or may be higher than elsewhere is not evidence pertaining to the functioning of the mandate.

    Do you know how high premiums would be in the absence of the mandate in Massachusetts? Evidence suggests higher. About the tea in China, I’ve got no idea. (OK, I’ve got a little idea, but I’m not satisfied with that evidence.)

    Share
    Comments closed
     
    • So all you’re saying is that a legal requirement that people buy insurance has led to… people buying insurance. Full stop?