Justice Clarence Thomas has secretly accepted luxury trips from a major Republican donors

Yes, premiums increased at a greater rate than inflation since the ACA was passed, exactly as I said. Thanks for adding a chart, I guess.

Pimiums increased, so it cannot have lowered premiums. At best you could try to argue that it slowed the growth of premiums, but that is going to be a very tough argument to prove.

This would be the only case in which increasing competition would result in higher costs.

 

Ok so not only are you saying that his antics aka accepting gifts as a judge (which is unethical) is race related and that apparently he has more of a burden on himself to be the opposite becasue he’s black


But now you’re saying he’s a diversity hire.


The far left is more racist than the right. I can’t believe what I’m hearing. There is absolutely no place for race here, you just can’t get your SJW head out of it. The reddits and YouTube’s are messing with your mind man

 

Yes it lowered premiums compared to what the rate of increase was - Newrox just showed this to you.

And it's not the greater competition that increases cost, it's competition that doesn't have to play by the same rules of the state.

 

Get the facts, those 2 are both dead or retired. Thomas should do the same.

 

Because you are a very, very silly person who does not understand global commerce.

 

Of course it's a diversity hire. His fake anecdotes of a welfare queen sister example is a fake story he made up to impress American right wing people because they like to hear these type of negative stereotypes of black people.

 

Premiums didn't lower, they increased. You are trying to argue that the increase was less than it otherwise would have been (which again, is not lowering), but there is insufficient evidence to support that conclusion. You also have not differentiated between those with preexisting conditions and young healthy people. Not all premiums were the same. Some premiums may have gone down (hint, the ones where the insurance company could no longer charge more just because the person buying insurance already has cancer). Some premiums have gone up (I know mine and other family members did, back when I was not employed through work). In the aggregate, premiums went up faster than inflation.

Competition that doesn't have to play by the same rules should lower costs even more than competition that does play by the same rules. If I am selling widgets produced in my factory in California where minimum wage is $15/hr and a competitor comes in selling the same widgets produced in his factory in Nevada where minimum wage is $10.50/hr, that is going to drive down prices, because his costs are lower.

The thesis was that in the information age, actions on the internet can affect sales of an item. I provided you with an example of actions on the internet affecting sales of an item. Replying with stock prices is not at all a rebuttal of that thesis.

 

What is wrong with these justices...

 

There needs to be some f*c*i*g accountability and term limits. Maybe how long presidents have 8 years with obviously no running after 4 years for reelection.

 

The funny part is if it was a liberal judge you know you would be singing a different tune

 

My thesis is that you don't understand what you are talking about at all and nobody should listen to you.

People who study health care economics and insurance economics don't use widgets and factories analogies because they don't work - they break down. Markets don't go to equilibrium. Information asymmetries, demand uncertainty. That's why they're entirely different fields of study

It's cliched and dumb to laugh at the John Galt quoting doofuses just blithely asserting some shitty piece of fiction they once read has given then the ability disregard this because, lol "the information age" .... but here we are, this dude is doing it.

Just because you can get your x-rays sent to your phone now, that doesn't mean ****. The information asymmetries of healthcare consumption are still there, as bad or worse than before.

I invite you to rebut this thesis, using the very serious rules of internet debates.

 

In a competitive insurance marketplace there wouldn't be information asymmetries or demand uncertainty. Surely, for example, you have shopped for malpractice insurance. You can look at the available policies, what coverage is offered by each, the associated premiums and deductibles, and then you decide what policy works best for you.

When have I ever quoted John Galt?

It has nothing to do with getting x-rays sent to your phone. Information asymmetries exist in every industry (although you are using information asymmetry in the consumption of healthcare to argue against the validity of price comparison and competition in the insurance market where the consumer can make well informed decisions about what plan to chose). That doesn't prevent a competitive insurance marketplace. You can, right now, look at available health insurance options. You can get quotes online for the policy you would like, based on what coverage you want. Currently, the ACA limits the options available to you, because there are no plans that are allowed to exclude people with preexisting conditions and no plans that allow you to purchase across state lines. An insurance company that was allowed to exclude people with preexisting conditions could charge lower premiums, because they would not have to carry the guaranteed losses associated with covering a hazard that has already occurred. Car insurance companies don't cover damages to your car that occurred before you signed up for the policy, because that isn't what insurance IS. The Democrats decided that they wanted to change the health insurance industry to an attempt at a worse version of socialized medicine, wherein everyone is required to pay into the system and everyone is required to be given coverage, but with the added cost of tons of different companies trying to administer it. They should have either left the old system or gone to a single payer system (although I would argue a single payer system is unconstitutional). Instead they did this weird regulatory scheme to try to fix it.

I did, you're welcome.

 

Another Judicial Ethics Story About Justice Thomas Falls Apart
Mark Paoletta explains the details of Harlan Crow's purchase of the Thomas childhood home.

https://reason.com/volokh/2023/05/02/another-judicial-ethics-story-about-justice-thomas-falls-apart/

 

With all the news coming out recently it's obvious the SCOTUS has not been transparent on financial transactions and that is not acceptable, at a minimum they need oversight with clear rules. I get the sense that some feel they are above the law and they don't have to explain this crap to the American citizens, this needs to stop.............but how? They cant be fired and were expecting them to resign, come on, not one will resign

 

has Harlan Crow ever had business before the court?

 

Most people paid less in insurance than they would have without ACA - this is provable and @NewRoxFan provided you that data, your individual experience does not refute that. Most people including myself - who was young and healthy at the time, paid less. Insurance costs were skyrocketing out of control, since ACA they have been far more controlled. ACA isn't perfect, but it did reform insurance.

The cost of premiums continue to rise not because of the insurance though, but because it doesn't control hospital and drug costs. Move to a single public option, and these costs would be controlled. Why is it that medicare is the cheapest and best insurance typically available - far better than the insurance you or I get? Wouldn't it be the libertarian thing to do to increase competition by letting medicare compete in the markets? But the industry doesn't want that. Funny.

You speak about competition in an idealistic way. In my experiences, ideals fail badly in reality. Theory doesn't dictate how things actually work. Insurance isn't widgets. There are many state laws and rules that make your widgets example fail. When one competitor has to abide by a set of rules and another does not - that isn't fair competition.

Yes I can give you polluted water for cheaper if you allow it. That's not good for the consumer. You can argue well then the consumer won't buy it...but not until after many get sick. Then that company will close up shop and create another one. Or find a way to adjust so that consumers can't tell. They will be the cheapest, but in a way the most expensive.

Human greed doesn't result in the best end. You have misplaced your faith in it.

 

'Way outside the norm': Texas billionaire paid for private school tuition for Clarence Thomas’ child

In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was “raising him as a son.”

Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin’s tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.

The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin’s tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

“Harlan picked up the tab,” said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. “Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well,” Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire’s Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin’s education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin’s education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow’s.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

“You can’t be having secret financial arrangements,” said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas’ actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn’t let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows “are among our dearest friends” and that he understood he didn’t have to disclose the trips.

ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

“Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth,” the statement said. “It’s disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political.” The statement added that Crow and his wife have “supported many young Americans” at a “variety of schools, including his alma mater.” Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin’s tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow’s office responded, “No.”

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas’ mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas’ wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

“This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I’ve seen,” said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.

Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who’d taken what Thomas had would have been fired: “This amount of undisclosed gifts? You’d want to get them out of the government.”

A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children. The law’s definition of dependent child is narrow, however, and likely would not apply to Martin since Thomas was his legal guardian, not his parent. The best case for not disclosing Crow’s tuition payments would be to argue the gifts were to Martin, not Thomas, experts said.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child’s education.

“The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It’s common sense,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. “It’s all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas.”

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate’s largesse over the decades. “I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person,” Martin said.

Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. “During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico,” the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas’ nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin’s situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in “under very similar circumstances.”

Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn’t have children of their own. They pitched Martin’s parents on taking the boy in.

“Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything — his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities,” journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows “at least once a year” throughout his childhood.

​

 

But but but... it was just a few vacations with a friend?