Paul Krugman: Public Plan Will Kill Private Insurance Plans

[meccaturbo]

What does this idiot Krugman, an economist, know about health care? Nothing at all. This liberal should be shackled in leg irons and kicked in the ass.

[cooperbry]

If this isn't proof that pretty much any Democrat can get a Nobel Prize, I don't know what is...

[ToSaveANationDotCom]

Haha, if I didn't have to "worry about getting it through Congress?" What he means is if he were the dictator he'd force us all into the plan that he wants. Thanks Paul. Why not just choose your own plan and let us choose ours? Oh, because he doesn't want to pay out of his own pocket for those who can't pay. We already pay for people without insurance through higher premiums. He simply wants all of us to pay for the plan that they choose instead. Again, thanks Paul, a true American hero!

[MrFarcry1966]

@ToSaveANationDotCom

Actually, what he means is getting enough of the mental retards that are Congressional Republicans to step away from the corporate trough at which they feed long enough to pass legislation that would actually benefit the whole population instead of just the CEOs of those corporations.

[bilgueits]

YEAH, KILL PRIVATE INSURANCE !!!

[minowekay]

Don't forget, Paul Krugman USED TO ADVISE ENRON.

Yeah, he's the one I want advising Obama.

[mongobobo]

Wow, what a naive little man. Like the juggernaught of private healthinsurance, healthcare and pharma would just roll over.

[gunsandbullhorns]

Paul Krugman shows tell-tale signs of being on either stimulant narcotics, or anti-psychotics, or anti-convulsives. I can't figure it out precisely. I personally suspect that he does MDMA or something very similar.

[pickyjohn]

So, snuffing out competition in favor of a government monopoly 2:17 is good. Yay, Paul!

[brothermikefan]

So, snuffing out our countrys' economic future by perpetuating the status quo in favor of enriching a handfull of big healthcare companies is good. Yay, John.

[semigotbanned]

Krugman is a fucking genius. Medicare for all is the smartest solution !

[Entropy137]

And why not food for all?

[semigotbanned]

indeed, why not ...

[Entropy137]

Because things need to be paid for and resources are limited. Food for all will allow people who don't produce to have a crapload of kids and they grow up and have a crapload of kids too until it becomes a giant clusterfuck.

[semigotbanned]

if you think nowadays food shortages limit the number of children or that kids actually die from hunger in the US growing up, you're a fucking lunatic .....

people spend less than 10% of income on food.

[Entropy137]

By food I mean living/surviving expenses. Obviously right now the average US citizen isn't deterred to have kids due to have lower income. I'm saying that a complete redistribution of wealth without capping population growth, can and probably will result in a continuous lowering of living standards for all if population growth out strips GDP growth. Also, I think that the percentage on food will rise in the coming years in America.

[semigotbanned]

"By food I mean living/surviving expenses"

lol, quite a unique definition!

Listen, there's a lot of redistribution going on in Europe, for example, and the population growth is massively negative!

Also, richer people ALWAYS have fewer kids. (just like the more educated people)

So your theory is just bullshit.

Educating, feeding and caring for people only improves the population situation, and makes people less desperate and more productive members of society (less violence, crimes, drugs etc)

[Entropy137]

As for Europe, we'll see how sound their economies are a few decades from now. It's too early to tell if they go down the road of deficit spending and debt. I am aware that richer people tend to have fewer kids, but my point is that to make your system foolproof, you would need the government to cap population growth. How it's done is up to you. I agree on the crime thing, but not on the productive thing. Can you show me empirical evidence that taking care of people makes them more productive?

[semigotbanned]

desperate, uneducated people cost tons of money to the society (one "semster" of prison costs more than one semester of university! + sentencing and police)

If you can keep a man out of prison as a taxpayer - you win twice. If you can provide him some basic education - you win three times!

The US has by far the biggest prison population. Are those people more productive??

The EU deficit thing:

You're all over the place! I thought we were talking about population growth.

Anyway, I'm out.

[bertly71]

Sure, like anyone believes a Clinton. Krugman called this one what it is. A takeover of our health care by the government.

[diffidatio]

Why do people, typically not rich, defend the private insurance companies so much? These companies kill people for a profit. We're the only industrialized country in the world that relies on private companies to do the right thing with something as important as health care. Health care is not a right in the Constitution, but we have, as a people, a moral duty to care for the less fortunate and a political duty to promote the common good in our republic.

[morgenr]

This is a straw man argument. I don't hear very many people defending insurance companies. What we are defending is our rights as individuals to make our own choices regarding healthcare for our families. I agree that we have a moral obligation to assist the less fortunate, but when the the concept of promoting the "common good" devolves into confiscation of wealth/property and infringement of personal liberty...we've gone too far.

[semigotbanned]

dude, who's gonna stop us from making our own choices regarding healthcare for our families??

Please learn about Medicare, because it's the total freedom of choice without Insurance Company bureaucrats messing with your health!

[minowekay]

@semigotbanned

Yes, no more Insurance Company bureaucrats!! With ObamaCare, only Government bureaucrats, who have NO incentive to satisfy the customers/patients. It's not like anyone can go anywhere else, once Government IS your healthcare option, your ONLY option.

[semigotbanned]

LOL you still think that insurers are there to satisfy the customers, you are so naive/stupid, or both

[minowekay]

semigotbanned, insurers provide a service. Private insurance companies cannot FORCE a person to purchase their policies. If they work hard to NOT satisfy the customer, then the sensible customer will go elsewhere.

Or are you suggesting that insurance companies collude, with ALL of them agreeing to shaft their customers equally, giving customers NO choice? Only Government can afford to operate that way.

[semigotbanned]

@minowekay

How can a customer go elsewhere? When an insurers denies payment or coverage you can't go elsewhere, it's too late!

You sound like a really dumb person who has absolutely no idea how things work in the real world.

[minowekay]

semigotbanned, you sound like a really dumb person who thinks government can and will perform more efficiently and more "fairly" than any private, profit-making entity.

I think you were somehow born in the wrong country. You seem to dislike and distrust private enterprise and love and trust Big Government. Try almost any other country for a better fit--and what I am sure you will believe is a better life.

[semigotbanned]

@minowekay

It's funny how you're not trying to defend your position at all, dumb man.

Just keep posting your ridiculous talking points ...

[minowekay]

semigotbanned, nice job of defending YOUR position.

Darn, it's pretty much indefensible, isn't it.

[semigotbanned]

@minowekay

You said that in case of unsatisfactory delivery a sensible customer will go elsewhere, meaning to another insurance company! Implying when it doesn't cover your cancer because you've had acne 30 years ago, you just go elsewhere!

So you have the audacity to come here to argue about health care when you don't know the first thing about the health care system!

America's biggest problem is the stupid people like you, these dumb fucks who don't even have the mental capacity of a chimp.

[minowekay]

semi, it does sound unreasonable that an insurance company would deny cancer coverage because of your acne 30 years ago. SO unreasonable that I would like you to provide a link or a cite so I can read the full story.

If you cannot, then I have to assume that you're just another Obama-trained ACORN thug, instructed to convince Americans--by lies and exaggerations--that Obamacare, unlike any of our other Government entitlements, will NOT go broke and WILL improve our healthcare service. HA!!!

[semigotbanned]

minowekay,

Acne is a pre-existing condition. What did you think, they were making billions by being reasonable?? Some insurers deny most of the claims!

Anyway, talking to a moron like you is pointless.

Go back you your Tea Klux Klan party, nobody's gonna challenge your idiocy there.

[minowekay]

Government, at all levels, inserts itself into medical insurance, thus distorting the market. Then government offers to come in and SAVE your health care because insurance has become so expensive.

By the way, more than once I HAVE uttered the words, "I love my insurance company. I do something stupid, THEY pay for it." And they do it again and again!

So, there, now you've heard of one more person defending a medical insurance company.

Redistribution of wealth=>NOT in the Constitution!

[eshnajizzle]

@minowekay

You pay for the treatment your insurance company gives you. Insurance companies are nothing, but pools of money, which expect that everyone doesn't need their expenses payed at the same time. If there is a time delay on payments to different people, they can invest the money to other things, and make a profit. It's still your money.

The difference between private and public insurance is that the public uses the money for public gain, not their private (or at least they should).

[minowekay]

esh, you and your friends should start a health insurance company. You can provide excellent service, never refuse a customer due to a pre-existing condition, and use ALL of your profits for the public good. YOU can work without a salary and really show up Blue Cross! Yours will become the most successful health insurance company in the country! ALL Americans with pre-existing conditions will use your company!

Provide employment, healthcare, public good. Win-win-win. Only in America!

[juarezrt]

They're called taxes. You should be used to it by now.

The govt (local, state, federal) takes away your money to pay for services for the general population. Most times, one doesn't even benefit directly.

Although if it was for health care, you would definitely make use of it at some point in your life.

[MrFarcry1966]

@morgenr

You as individuals don't make your "own choices," bub. You pick from what the corporations are willing to give you, according to how much money you have. That's a pretty narrow range of "choice." But don't let reality spoil your ideological wet dream or anything.

[ProfGJones]

There is no such thing as a "right" to healthcare. The only people who have a "right" to the fruits of the labor of others are slave owners.

What you do have is the right to engage in mutually agreed to contracts. Oh wait, actually you don't thanks to government regulations.

[minowekay]

I only wish there were a way to give a "thumbs up" with a number of exclamation marks.

The bunch now in control of two branches of Congress seem to want to punish the U.S. with a little REVERSE SLAVERY. Doctors (etc.) now exist to serve those who NEED them (and it's wrong to make PROFIT on the backs of the ill). It may not increase the quality of our health care but it's guaranteed to reduce the supply of doctors.

[rasta108]

why are people so up in arms about the private insurance companies 'rights' to profit on the health care system??? people have a right to health care without bankruptcy! public plan would kill the private plan because it would work better!!!

[stewart0312]

because we are a stupid country.

[CommonSenseJoe]

It would not work better. It would kill private plans because it would have no operating basis in reality. It could promise great benefits at a lower cost, but would require my tax dollars to survive.

Once it killed off all the private plans, then it would be single payer. It would require more tax dollars and price control, wage control, and rationing of care to survive. BAD IDEA!

[vllmer]

Doublespeakers, all of them. "In the end kill the private plan". Then all the awakening of people to this is called unamerican. You're the unamerican one, paul k.

Drive economy into ground, blow trillions into space, call yourself an expert while we all lose our jobs...go to another country and live the dream, we don't want you here.