• Link to Youtube
  • Link to LinkedIn
Stanford Center on Longevity
  • ABOUT
    • GENERAL
      • About SCL
      • Annual Reports
      • Contact
    • PEOPLE
      • Leadership, Scholars & Staff
      • New Map of Life Impact Fellows
      • Faculty Affiliates
      • Advisory Council
      • SCL Ambassadors
    • AFFILIATED CENTERS
      • Stanford Distinguished Careers Institute
      • Glenn Foundation for Medical Research
      • Stanford Lifestyle Medicine
  • RESEARCH & INNOVATION
    • The New Map of Life Initiative
    • Postdoctoral Fellows Program
    • The Futures Project on Education and Learning for Longer Lives
    • The Sightlines Project
    • Longevity Design Challenge
    • Publications
  • MEDIA & EVENTS
    • SCL Magazine
    • Longevity Book Club
    • Century Summit
    • Century Lives Podcast
    • SCL in the News
    • Videos
  • ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES
    • Press inquiries
    • Postdoctoral Fellowship application
    • Industrial Affiliates Program
    • Stanford Courses
    • Make a gift
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu

HOW HEALTH REFORM PUNISHES WORK, January 2010
In an April, 2001 opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, Center on Longevity Faculty Affiliate Dan Kessler examined the unintended consequences of a little-discussed part of the healthcare reform bill—the over $100 billion per year subsidies the government will provide to help purchase health insurance. Kessler, the David S. and Ann M. Barlow Professor of Law and Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, presented the following example:

“A family of four headed by a 55-year-old earning $31,389 in 2014 dollars (134% of the federal poverty line) in a high-cost area will get a subsidy of $22,740. This will cover 96% of an insurance policy that the Kaiser Family Foundation predicts will cost $23,700. A similar family earning $93,699 (400% of poverty) gets a subsidy of $14,799. But a family earning $1 more—$93,700—gets no subsidy.”

What Kessler points out is what economists call “notches”—large discontinuous changes in benefits. Prior economic research has shown that such notches incentive people to work less so as not to exceed income thresholds. Kessler also points out that because the subsidies are so large relative to income that when taxes are included even smoothing out the notches could imply that for every additional dollar earned by families in the subsidy range only twenty cents would come back to the family as additional spendable income. Kessler’s conclusion is straightforward:

“The only fix is to drastically reduce or eliminate the premium subsidies. As the 2012 elections approach, voters will have to decide: For middle-income families, should economic success be determined by work and savings, or by participation in a government program?”

Read the full article at The Wall Street Journal
 
 
 
farmer's marketMOBILE DEVICES HELP REMOVE BARRIERS TO FRESH FOOD, August 2010
Conditions can be challenging for those using wheelchairs or walkers, with a trip to the market requiring residents to travel down a busy street, and to navigate around sidewalks blocked by parked cars, poorly lit streets and a crosswalk light too brief for them to cross the four- lane intersection. These physical barriers to fresh-food sources are often overlooked by city planners. Learn how Center on Longevity faculty affiliate Abby King and other Stanford researchers are working to solve these problems.
Read more

1 2

© Copyright - Stanford Center on Longevity
  • Link to Youtube
  • Link to LinkedIn
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top