Universal Healthcare Debate 2: Paul Krugman (2/12)

[drcphd]

Krugman is in wonderland, as usual.

[MsZeitgeist85]

He makes more sense than those crackpots, Sally Pipes, Cannon and Stossel.

[SoulPower00]

"In this country, the government already pays more healthcare bills than private insurers do." How can he say this with a straight face after discussing the turmoil U.S. healthcare is in?? Government involvement and heavy regulation is EXACTLY what has destroyed our healthcare. And you want more of it???

[Ohjai32]

Wooo! Health care!

[100CommonCents]

krugman forgets to say that tax is forced. and by saying 'we think we should help them' isn't a suggestion, because if the government decides, you either obey or go to jail. so perhaps we should help them out. but it's another question all together to say we should force people to give up their money to pay for other people. charity is good, but forced tax to pay someone else is not charity.

[slickbtk]

krugman is not a smart guy, very delusional

[idontgiveashit0930]

Ethics is a discipline that belongs to philosophy..and uh keynesian talking about efficiency?

[PrudenceWright]

medicare is bankrupt. Krugman is an idiot.

[kcscene0]

Roger Goodell did a great job as moderator.

[syghur]

@TeaPartyPatroit I'd bet money that you're not actually part of the Tea Party. Way to promote the propaganda though.

[soccer92489]

Nobody has a right to someone else's services... its called slavery we only have negative rights.. freedom of speech, LIberty Private Property pursuit of happiness does that sound familiar

[iluminatr462]

@soccer92489 the right to private property is a positive right, is it not? you should be consistent and also deny the idea of government enforced property rights.

[soccer92489]

@iluminatr462 No its 100 Percent a Negative Right

[YaknowItdo]

Medicare huh....

HOWS THAT DOING!!!!!

35 TRILLION IN DEBT!!

ITS A PONZI SCHEME

EVERYONE WILL BE COVERED!!! right huh....

theres relatively less old people now then there will be in 40-50 years.. ITS IMPOSSIBLE

someone give me figures on how we can pay with our booming poputation

WHILE

giving the same level of care

[54321nate]

The difference between helping a victim of a natural disaster and providing health care is immense. "When there is something we can do we believe you should do it." I can't perform surgery on your heart, but I can give my time and energy by helping you out in a disaster. Paul Krugman is compairing two hugely different scenarios here, try to get you to feel compassion for one victim, then transfer that compassion to another in his view. Communities band together all the time to help, we can too

[VBackseatRomeoV]

I think by "helping", with regards to discussing healthcare, Paul was saying you can help by giving up a bit of your income for somebody else's health.

[Olbermann4Prez]

I don`t understand how you think your health care system is more efficient when your country spends twice the amount of capita per person and has one of the lowest life expectancies in the industrialized world.

[AlecsDeLarge]

The best way to fix that situation is to change the way we report our mortality. The USA reports infant mortality when the infant dies after delivery and attempts to resuscitation. Germany reports this situation as still-born birth, not infant mortality. This and many other cultural confounders alter actual data.

Try to be more responsible for our sake, when you can't account for the basal assumptions you make.

[Olbermann4Prez]

I would suggest that you take heed to your own words. To begin with, Germany method of counting IMR is in line with the WHOs definition which correspond with the US. Most countries have adopted the WHOs definition as late as *drumroll* the late 90's, so you argument seems to be a bit antiquated. Secondly, neither the WHO or US CDC has found differences in reporting (such as premature death) to be the primary explanation for the US low international ranking.

[KawaiiDesuNekoBCSK]

Mind explaining HOW our life expectancy is the lowest?

The report that that's based on is severely skewed and doesn't mention the fact the US has a different standard of what an infant is, for example, for optimal results in bashing the health care system that actually innovates.

[hmunkey]

I don't think a government, whose ONLY job is to protect and serve its citizens, should allow said citizens' health to be run as a for-profit industry.

[AlecsDeLarge]

profit earned legitimately is a good thing. If you disagree, I can give you my bank account number to distribute your profits to me.

[PatchesRips]

"profit earned legitimately is a good thing"

I think the crucial word here is "legitimately". There are limits to this. Most countries set that limit at a lower tolerance than the US. There's something disturbing about the idea of insisting real people suffer real pain, real poverty, and real death in observance of an abstract principle.

[gunsandbullhorns]

Paul Krugman dodging the efficiency question and hiding behind "morality". Why am I not surprised by this?

Paul Krugman is about as "moral" as his hero John Maynard Keynes. I hope his opponents expose him for the joke that he is.

[Sivels]

Aye

[xxxlilxjayxxx]

since when did efficiency trump morality?

[gunsandbullhorns]

xxxlilxjayxxx—

Efficiency does not trump morality. But efficiency is central to the question of practicability. The problem is that we're being screwed by onerous healthcare costs. As an economist, Krugman should be the one making economic arguments in favor of his position, or at the very least explaining WHY prices are so high. He's not doing that.

Also, his moral arguments are one-sided.

[Zakdayak]

Actually, healthcare in other countries is more efficient.

[gunsandbullhorns]

Yes sir, there are many countries in which healthcare is more efficient, and there are a handful of explanations for WHY other countries enjoy more efficient healthcare. I wish more economists would tackle this issue.

...not that I would likely agree with Krugman if he DID make an economic argument. But an economic argument to debate is much more productive than debating an appeal to sympathy.

[xfvkemosx]

lets just copy singapore or taiwan and call it a day cause we win.

cause they win

so therefore we will win

[noone120000]

everyone should have health care but do not let the government get involved.

[mistortugas]

yeah, let's let the insurance companies keep profiting from people's health...

[VictoryCough]

But hospitals and doctors don't profit from peoples health or lack there of?

[SwedxSimon02]

everyone should be free from physical abuse but do not let the government get involved.

[TimeWarp66]

@noone120000

hear hear!

[gundamWWW]

@noone120000

Yeah let's get rid of government run healthcare for the troops!

They should have to deal with insurance companies just like everyone else.

Greater competition in the military for healthcare providers sounds like a great idea, the government shouldn't have a monopoly on the welfare of soliders!

[rsorola1]

@gundamWWW our troops put their lives on the line everyday and the ones on the front lines usually dont get paid very much, you can say shit like this online but i would bet my money you wouldnt say this at a hospital treating our injured troops

[gundamWWW]

@rsorola1

You missed the complete intent of my statement. (It was sarcasm)

If government healthcare is good enough for the troops, its good enough for the citizens who contribute to the economy, pay their taxes and pledge alliegence to the United States of America.

That's my point.

[TimeWarp66]

@gundamWWW

Your point is wrong.

Socialism doesn't work for the troops, and it won't work for the rest of us either.

[gundamWWW]

@TimeWarp66

The Military is modeled after a socialist system...

No ownership of private property

Top down command structure

Limit on individual autonomy, collective group action (that's why you are assigned into units)

The arms industry is subsidized by the government (not free market competition)

Government provision of food and services (including healthcare)

That is socialism in theory and practise.

[TimeWarp66]

@gundamWWW

The military is an essential function of government. It's a neccessary evil. It's not something to point to as a model in how to run a society!

Most soldiers would rather be treated at the Mayo Clinic that at the VA.

[gundamWWW]

@TimeWarp66

You make a good point, but does the VA sucks because it's modeled incorrectly or because it's not funded properly?

Instead of spending soo much money on building weapons and equipment, why not take care of our own people.

I frankly don't care about Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or some other country, I only care about America and Americans.

[TimeWarp66]

@gundamWWW

I agree with you on foreign affairs. The government shouldn't be policing the world or running the economy. In my view the only proper role of government is to protect individual freedom.

All heads of government programs claim their particular program is underfunded. In reality, government is simply inneficient because they're spending other people's money. If Microsoft or Walmart are underfunded, they go out of business. But the VA and DMV just reach deeper into tax payer pockets.

[doddsalfa]

@gundamWWW sorry but the military model is must older than the great system of socialism.

[doddsalfa]

@TimeWarp66 it won't work for the US.It works fine in Scandinavia.

[nolenzvolenz]

I'd like to know who thinks everything is good. If youre one these people who thinks our system is working ,you probably havent been hurt or sick. When it comes for you {and it will} i think youll be singing a diferent song. Im talking to those of you who actually have coverage. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR CLAIM

[Sjester101]

Why is he saying that their are not many who believe the government does not have the responsibility of providing for its citizens. He is trying to lie to the country and convince the citizens that if you believe otherwise you are the minority which is a lie. Has he not listened to the town hall debates?

[ripper1776]

deciusaquilinas,

KEEP YOUR GOVERNMENT OFF OF MY MEDICARE. DON'T KILL MY GRANDMA!

[deciusaquilinas]

To all the obama voters. Baa, baa,baa,baa,

[SuperZzz1234]

I am Canadian American. I have spent exactly half my life in each country respectively. The American Health Care system is garbage. The Canadian is far better (but still has flaws.) And no I am not poor. In fact I have quite a lot of money and premium health insurance. But the efficiency, cost, and moral integrity of this American system is despicable.

[Melpheos1er]

anyone honest who had the same experience as yours would say the same.

[IPOMonster]

Here are the facts people:

1. You're a fucking moron if you support Gov-Controlled Medicine.

2. You're a fucking moron if you think the Gov can control costs

3. You're a fucking if you think your taxes and expenses won't SKYROCKET!

4. You're a fucking moron if you DON'T already have Health Insurance

It's not The MOnster's responsibility to support you and your fucked-up family. Get a decent job morons - this shit won't pass.

[SuperZzz1234]

1. Ad homonym attacks get you no where. As an argumentative technique it simply shows your lack of rational and excess of emotional frustration.

2. I do have Health Insurance and make well over 250,000 a year.

3. Healthcare spending in America is the highest in the world. Beyond this fact it is also extremely concentrated with 5 % of the population accounting for more then half the costs.

4. 60% of bankruptcies in the US are healthcare related. 75% of those individuals had healthcare.

[SuperZzz1234]

5. Healthcare is an inelastic commodity. In the hands of private insurers prices can be and have been inflated on a whim. This is why Americans pay a significantly higher amount on prescription drugs then other industrialized nations.

6. The enforcement of intellectual property rights with regard to medical innovations sky rockets prices on the products or services until patent expiration.

[SuperZzz1234]

7. Affordable healthcare relates to less fear of visiting a doctor and there by is likely to create a healthcare system revolving more heavily on preventative care rather then catastrophic. This lowers costs and increases the health of all Americans.

8. Universal Health Care is mobile for individuals moving or switching jobs.

9. According to the Commonwealth Fund America ranks remarkably low on quality of care, efficiency of care, access to care, safe care, equity, and wait times.

10.

[SuperZzz1234]

10. I can attest to number nine considering that when had minor bruising on my hip in Canada I was helped within 10 minutes of arriving to the doctor. Where as in America when I was enduring an extreme fever and respiratory problems across state lines it took over 4 hours of waiting to see a physician in the emergency.

11. A single payer system could save $286 billion a year in overhead and paperwork. Universal Health Care eliminates the middle man thus making spending more efficient.

[SuperZzz1234]

12. People can contract illness simply based upon their genetic makeup. This would make contracting illness and sickness a distinct trait of being human and there by make healthcare a right.

13. For profit motivation in healthcare is a complete falsehood. The US's complete lack of innovation in Antibiotics is the result of drug companies neglecting it as not as profitable.

14. Doctors increase competition in care for patients when for profit motive is abolished.

[SuperZzz1234]

15. Providing Universal Health care cuts costs for companies that should be working in the free market. A large part of the American auto companies near collapsing was health care costs they made.

16. Considering how excessively concentrated spending currently is Universal Health Care would drastically spread out the capital base thus lowering costs to the individual.

[SuperZzz1234]

I could go on with at least 20 more but if the economical, health, and all around logical arguments can't turn you then simply think of the moral imperative. Even if Health Care was working well for insured Americans (which it is completely and utterly not) the 45 million uninsured have a right to be treated. This narcissistic inflation of the ego in some people is ridiculous. The mega-rich need more then hard work. There is a component of luck which so many neglect. It is detestable.

[IPOMonster]

Super...

All The MOnster sees is a bunch of nonsense.

Do you have a point son? Or do you simply like to hear yourself talk?

You're a moron if you think UHC will SAVE money you goofy moron...

[SuperZzz1234]

Obviously you didn't read number one.

[d3p3ch3mod3]

the pro side just bashes the current system and the anti side just bitches about the canadian system and uses the word socialism as much as possible.. i am so sick of trying to find out where i stand on this fucking issue.. global warming is also like that, you have to spend years trying to figure the shit out

[atlant80]

No, global warming is not the same as health care. Global climate change and global warming are scientific facts, like gravity and atomic theory. There is no questioin about whether or not it's happening and whether or not it's largely caused by humans. It is, on both counts. Don't believe the conservatives who are trying to politicize it. Health care is a different issue, and open for debate. Global Climate Change is not.

[d3p3ch3mod3]

Yea but what's the proof that CO2 is causing enough of it

[atlant80]

1/2: Because CO2 (and methane, and CFCs) is (are) a tipping factor(s). Water vapor makes up the VAST majority of "green house gases", i.e. gasses that keep heat within the atmosphere. However, the amount of atmospheric water vapor is incredibly stable, and fluctuates very little under normal circumstances. However, CO2 and the other gases I mentioned not only trap MUCH more heat than water vapor within the atmosphere, but they actually increase the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere.

[atlant80]

2/2 This is through a feedback mechinism where more CO2 (and methane, etc.) leads to higher temperatures, which evaporate more water, causing more heat trapping water vapor in the atmosphere, causing higher temperatures, causing more water vapor, etc. This is just one small part of climate change, really. Ice cap melting changes weather patterns, which also have huge effects, etc. Basically, a huge increase of CO2 and other gases causes a dangerous cycle that normally wouldn't happen.

[d3p3ch3mod3]

Yeah that's the theory but what's the hard evidence that they can't refute? I thought inconvenient truth's chart thing was pretty good but they usually even have plenty of things to say to that

[atlant80]

The hard evidence has been recorded and the phenominum observed. Climatology is not something you can put into a test tube and watch it bubble. There is much less experimintation and much more observation, and then you use the observations to build computor models that simulate the event. All those simulation based on the recorded evidence support what I said as the general climate change/global warming theory (and in science, a theory is a very strong explanation for a plethora of facts)

[d3p3ch3mod3]

Ok but what about the other scientists the oil companies trot out that have also been climatologists their whole lives and say things like they think the temp is causing the CO2 rise but the CO2 rise doesn't have much effect on the temp.

When they say it's the sun, you can point out that if that were the case the sun's temp would correspond more with the upper atmosphere instead of the lower atmosphere but i don't see what the comeback is to the former

[atlant80]

Yeah, I've heard of that hypothesis before. The vast (96-97%) of climatologists believe that humans are causing global climate change in large part. Again, don't believe the hype. But as to that hypothesis, yes, in natural cicumstances, CO2 follows after warming because warming causes more CO2, which causes more warming, causing more CO2 (natural CO2 that is, not human caused) etc. However, these aren't natural circumstances. The amount of CO2 hjas SKYROCKETED in the past few decades.

[d3p3ch3mod3]

Yea but if you site that study they usually just whip out the old gag that scientists just go where the money is since petroleum geologists are the biggest doubters & the climate researchers are the biggest believers according to the survey -it's stupid but I'm just saying it's not enough to shut them up lol..

To the skyrocketing CO2 they usually just mention the same stupid shit about how we're cooling now which is of course BS since we've only cooled since the record highs in 2003

[atlant80]

I can see you are an intelligent individual who has studied the debate in the popular media, but do not be fooled. There is no serious debate in the scientific community on the issue. It's decided. Now we just have to figure out what we can do about it.

[chngdwrld]

All we know is the aid Washington gives away overseas each year is a trillion dollars.Now why do they do that?All Senators working today should be fired!Israelgives their people free education and Healthcare.Iranthe same!

[Questfortruth86]

Krugman, stick to temporary international trade trends.

[PattySoandSo]

Oh, and like John Stossel is the foremost authority on health care? You wrote not one word about him sticking to overcoming stuttering. More, I don't see him extolling those wholly un-workable Libertarian points of view he has when it comes to the DOD budget. Why's that, I wonder -- too chicken shit? We spend 800 billion in FY 2008 and will spend 1 trillion in 2009 -- check out the OMB website. Do ya' know how many millions of people can get health care with a trill a year? More than the US

[Questfortruth86]

Shut up.

[DeadAreDancing]

Shut the fuck up whoo, you've posted at least 5 paragraphs and still didn't say anything worth a damn.

[whoo689]

The other thing about gov't "charity" is that it's the most invisible of all. The only people who deal with the poor in these entitlement agencies are the actual gov't employees. It's not volunteer, most of the time, like with soup kitchens or national service. Bureaucrats mostly deal with poor folks under these systems, while the non-gov't people that champion these systems never come in contact w/ the poor. They just assume they're working.

[whoo689]

To me, that seems like a very elitist way to "fight for the poor." You champion these programs which you'll never see in action or even come into contact w/ the poor under. It's like "I'll pay the taxes and fight for these programs to help the poor, but I don't wanna be bothered by the poor bums." It's "too much" for the left.

[whoo689]

I'm tired of liberals and Democrats always talking about how we have a "moral duty" to provide the welfare state. But WHOSE duty? The government's? NO! It's our duty as individuals to help the poor and suffering. And I'm sorry, but gov't does not properly represent all of the people or society. It's a small sector within the country that doesn't know wtf it's doing 95% of the time. Spend your own money helping others with healthcare. I"ll do the same for people I care aobut.

[PattySoandSo]

First, whoo has likely never left the USA, except to go to Tijuana to hold an illegally raised lion cub in his arms while a dude took his foto for $25, so he's just not familiar with all of those nations -- many of which we consider beneath us -- that provide health care to all as a constitutional right. Let's take the fact that lots of folks are making lots of bread off health insurance (rather disgusting concept when one considers it) out of the margins and into the mainstrream of the debate.

[Craftz16]

Tell me how many other americans are as fortunate as you where they can provide healthcare to their families. If you ask your government to protect you from terrorist attacks why cant they protect you from illnesses and dieseases?

[whoo689]

It just means that it's IMPOSSIBLE to cover everyone. Why does the Left always have this utopian wish to cover every single person? And if someone's NOT covered, they always assume the worst- that they're gonna die tomorrow and not be able to afford surgery or drugs or whatever. Truth is, the 47 million number is a joke. Only a very small fraction are actually people who can't afford health care and desperately need it. And many of them get new healthcare wihtin just a few months!

[whoo689]

Letting people keep more of what they earn is much better. Spontaneous order WORKS! It's why the free market has given us such prosperity. Government central planning is terrible. They can't predict what people will do all the time or respond to market forces. All the gov't does is boss people around and spend money on unsustainable or risky projects they have no data even proving the efficacy.

Even if the gov't could cover 300 million, would we REALLY spend less than 15% on healthcare?

[whoo689]

No. The costs would just be shifted to the gov't. We can't magically reduce our healthcare spending from 15% of GDP to 10% just by going public.  That's absurd! Before Medicare and Medicaid and all this other healthcare intervention in the 1960s, we had far lower spending on healthcare, about 5% of GDP. yet it's tripled. Why? It's precisely due to the gov't's insane level of intervention. Yes, there will be people who can't get covered or afford. But that's not an indictment of the system.

[whoo689]

Krugman is such a douche. Liberal economists should just leave the profession with their claptrap about "morality." You think conservative economists don't care about morality? Of course they do! They don't like the immorality of forcing us to have higher taxes and spending just to cover a few million more people the private market has "ignored." 85% of people can get covered. 15% or less are not. And Krugman thinks it's ok to make the 85% suffer for the benefit of 15%? Outrageous!

[whoo689]

You know what the sad thing is? Liberals, as studies show, spend far less money on charity than conservatives or moderates. Yet they're always the loudest when it comes to proposing using OTHERS' money (taxpayer dollars) for all these entitlements. Isn't that a little hypocritical? When it's your money, it's not ok to spend because of all the "other obligations" you have. But it's entirely fine to be reckless with other people's money.

[Craftz16]

but most conervatives support big corporations who create such pollution that causes these illnesses to happen.

[creamycurdy]

seems america health care serves the rich only

[thrashertm]

Krugman's argument is foolish. He says that everyone wants the government to help people that can't help themselves, if it's not their fault. Guess what; we are the product of decisions made by ourselves or our parents (in the case of children). If you decide to live in a hurricane-prone region, you are rolling the dice and should live with the consequences. I live in the midwest - don't expect me to bail your ass out. Just like I don't expect you to bail out the stupid Big 3...

[TimeWarp66]

Both those bureaucracy's are horribly wasteful and Inefficient at allocating resources to help the sick. Look at the Singapore model of healthcare here on youtube. It's an individual insurance market, far superior than any government monopoly.

[HarveyRex23]

You right wing Libertarians are something else.

[TimeWarp66]

I didn't realize their are left- wing Libertarians?

Liberals and Libertarians actually agree on quite a bit.

However, you didn't respond to a single point I made. Fail.

[HarveyRex23]

An unregulated marketplace is like basketball without refs and rules. But you go ahead and believe all you want about the evils of big government. Even though you benefit from government programs as well. If you don't want to pay taxes here, why don't you apply for citizenship in Singapore. You certainly like their healthcare system.

[HarveyRex23]

Sure there are left wing Libertarians. I think they're called Libertarian Socialists & Left Libertarianism. I just don't eye to eye on a lot of the issues Libertarian Conservatism adheres to.But as a liberal such as myself. I guess we can agree to disagree when it comes to what the role of government should be for the citizenry.

[TimeWarp66]

Voting away someone's money to provide universal healthcare is just as evil as voting away a gay persons right to get married, or a woman's right to have an abortion. majority consensus is incompatible with a free society.

[HarveyRex23]

Individual insurance markets doesn't work in a country of 300 million. And speaking of wasteful spending. Government spending actually creates revenues. Not taxcuts. The roads & bridges you drive on. Is that wasteful spending? The public schools we have, is that wasteful spending? The police and firefighters, is that wasteful spending? Jesus Christ, if we can pay taxes into those, then Goddamit. We can spend taxes in covering everyone with healthcare.

[whoo689]

Public schools, yes. They're TERRIBLE in this country! Private schools can do it much better for less. And the problem with public schools K-12 is that they don't have the same things universities have: competition and decentralization. They haven't "marketized" them. Public schools in many areas are a monopoly. Either you go to the public school, which is free, or you gotta pay huge for a better private school. That's why some areas have vouchers, to open those schools up.

[gold95]

Krugman is a collectivist. Notice how he constantly uses "we," "us" "everybody" and other collective terms, negating the individual, and attempts to persuade using "three men make a tiger."

Its disgusting.

[CaesarXXIV]

I never knew "collectivists" receive the Nobel Prize for economics...

[gold95]

What does that mean? That popular theories get rewarded? Are you surprised? Popular isn't always a reflection of what is right. George Bush was President and he is a moron, so how much weight does popularity carry?

[gold95]

Krugman is a moron, using argumentum ad populum as a basis for his view. That is just ridiculous. Under what theory, legal or natural, does he base his authority?

[majinspy]

@gold95 Democracy is argumentum ad populem...

[BeyondTheSpectrum08]

Private health insurance is a private tyranny that only exists in United States. It's a rather barbaric system that tells you you're health is only worth what you can afford. Government cannot solve every issue, but neither can the free market. Under the current system, the major cause of personal bankruptcy is due to high medical bills. Make doctors civil servants, streamline personal records into a single onlne database, and limit advertisement for commercial medicine.

[KyndestKid]

Perfectly said BeyondTheSpectrum08!

[Chainedorlo]

Our healthcare industry has about half of it's helathcare paid by the government and is heavy regulated. What's free about it?

[1Natecore]

the main flaw in this guy's argument is he bases it around the elderly. What he doesn't realize is that in a universal system the elderly will be the last to get help. The government's job is to keep people paying taxes the longest, so if they had to decide between the 25 year old or the 65 year old for the liver transplant the younger individual will receive the care every time.

[TimeWarp66]

Oh please. Their is no way doctors are that maniacal, in every industrialized, first world country with universal healthcare. Denying the elderly just to keep the youth alive to collect more taxes in the long run? Thats insane! Pure propaganda!

[1Natecore]

Doctors might not be, but I'm talking about the government. When you and I look for any service or product we use our ability to choose the cheapest or most beneficial thing for us, the individual. The gov't will use that same discretion we use as consumers to get the most out of their money.

[girzwald3]

What a fucking tool. He neglects to mention that every single one of those programs is massively in debt.

[KyndestKid]

You're a tool... in 2006 50% of home foreclosures were caused by by people who got sick and coudn't afford their mortgage.

Furthermore, 75% of the 50% of who's homes were foreclosed upon had health insurance before the onset of their chronic illness.

In other words they did everything right... they paid into the system their entire life and lost everything and 18,000 people(6 9/11's a year) will die this year because of a lack of health insurance. Go privatize Social Security..good idea :)

[girzwald3]

Aside from some nice made up statistics, that doesn't prove that socialized healthcare would fix ANYTHING. Also, it doesnt dismiss what I said. Because all those programs, including canadas healthcare system, are massively in debt. Hint. If something cant support itself, it doesnt work.

Now look whos the tool.

[hqlion]

Yes, idiots can win a Nobel prize.

[Claytrainor]

evidence would suggest the above is true.

These programs have contributed to the massive debt the USA now has.

I'm a Canadian, and i can tell you first hand that our medical system sucks here. My grandpa had a brain tumor, and he had to wait 6 months for an MRI, and by that time it was too late, and there was nothign that coudl be done.

Also, how do you expect America to give everyone free health care, when you have an estimated $18 billion debt to foreign nations?

Study up man.

[Claytrainor]

i meant 18 trillion, not billion!

You guys are so fucked it's not funny. Go ahead, try to get free health care, it'll just collapse your system faster.

You guys vote for politicians based on "free handouts" like health care.

The founders would be ashamed of the scams you get suckered into.

[markasaro1]

Krugman is a moron!

[saucy05]

moron with a noble prize under his belt!

[gloryoski]

"You actually have to go and look a couple of gov't statistics that are easily available..."

He's stealing Noam's shtick.

[ericfeinberg28]

he better be our next fed chair or treasury secretary or something. hes way too qualified for the sideline

[semiliteratedgod]

some good points ...