Last night, when the Fox News Special Report all-star panel took its show off the air and went to its online-only segment, host Bret Baier read a viewer question that hasn’t been fully asked or answered (and certainly wasn’t in the runup to the bill’s passage) about Obamacare.

Namely, now that we see that Obamacare’s premiums are going to be considerably higher then what they were in the individual market – one study has premiums going up by 41 percent on the average nationally – what happens in the inevitable event that purchasers of Obamacare policies run out of money and can’t meet the $600-800 a month premiums demanded to cover them for things like maternity for men or prostate cancer for women?

The panel – Charles Krauthammer, A.B. Stoddard  and Andrew Napolitano – didn’t have a definitive answer for that. They did have some interesting thoughts on the unanswered question, though, and what effect it would have on Obamacare and the country as a whole.

A partial transcript, courtesy of the Daily Caller…

NAPOLITANO: So the ’47 percent,’ which impaled Romney will go over 50 percent if this legislation succeeds in moving people below the poverty level and making them dependent on the government. And they vote.

KRAUTHAMMER: Which is part of the plan. However, if you were wealthier and you lose it and you end up on Medicaid, I don’t think you’ll vote Democratic.

STODDARD: I really don’t think the White House had a fantasy of this kind of a disaster. I just can’t imagine —

(CROSSTALK)

KRAUTHAMMER: You misunder — it’s a political disaster. But the geniuses, the economists — if you hear Ezekiel Emanuel say on the “Fox News Sunday” this was designed — you had to get people out of the individual insurance market, generally people of some means, you put them in the exchanges, they overpay and you use the subsidy. This was not an accident. What they never understood is how disastrous it would be politically. But economically, that’s the way they make it work.

BAIER: It is pretty incredible to try to get 5-7 million on the upside by March — the amount of money to try to get 7 million people in these exchanges.

NAPOLITANO: It would be less expensive if they just paid the premiums for the 7 million out of the federal treasury.