• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Paul Krugman About ObamaCare

Lafayette said:
If ignorance is bliss, you must think you're in heaven.

For the first time since ever, 20 million Americans have access to HealthCare that was not permitted (due to its extravagant cost) before ObamaCare.
Click to expand...

Premiums have soared under Obamacare.
They have gone up 20-40%. Since it was implemented.

Yes ignorance is bliss.

20 million are covered at the expense of everyone else.

I am still waiting on my 2500 premium reduction I haven't seen it.

My insurance has greatly increased under Obamacare though.
It is still even more expensive now than it was before.

You can't consider subsidies when looking at cost.

It is such a blunder that the largest insurance companies are pulling out.
They have lost millions and millions of dollars as was predicted they would do.

Yes ignorance is bliss that is why you don't know anything about his subject.

That doesn't include the millions of people that can't find doctors or people to take their Obamacare.
It doesn't include the fact that it costs them a fortune in oop costs.
 
Lutherf said:
Healthcare in France is nearly free? Do you not have taxes in France?
Click to expand...

Not to mention people have to get supplimental insurance as their government doesn't cover everything.
Also they still have copay etc ... to pay on top of all the taxes.
 
ludin said:
20 million are covered at the expense of everyone else.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but when your arse is on the line because of War, that's different!

You don't give a damn about the cost of defending the nation, do you?

Come out of your "shell", little boy ...
 
Lutherf said:
Healthcare in France is nearly free? Do you not have taxes in France?
Click to expand...

Boy, do we ever. HealthCare is expensive in any developed nation on earth. But HC is nearly free to all citizens. (Just like more than half the Discretionary Budget spent on the DoD - more than $600B - is "free" for you in the US! ;^)

We have much higher taxation rates than the US, but said taxes pay for (1) a first-rate National Health Care and (2) I put two kids through university for only $1000 a year (including room 'n board) because the total cost was subsidized by the French government ...
 
Lafayette said:
Yeah, but when your arse is on the line because of War, that's different!

You don't give a damn about the cost of defending the nation, do you?

Come out of your "shell", little boy ...
Click to expand...

again you failed to address what was actually said.
you concession is noted. if this is all you can come up with
it is begin to not even bother a response anymore.
 
Suppose you want to make insurance available to people with pre-existing conditions. You can’t just forbid insurance companies to discriminate based on medical history; if you do that, healthy people won’t sign up until they get sick. So you have to mandate the purchase of insurance; and you have to provide subsidies to lower-income families so that they can afford the policies. The end result of this logic is … Obamacare.

And one more thing: Insurance policies must meet a minimum standard. Otherwise, healthy people will buy cheap policies with paper-thin coverage and huge deductibles, which is basically the same as not buying insurance at all.

So yes, Obamacare somewhat restricts choice — not because meddling bureaucrats want to run your life, but because some restrictions are necessary as part of a package that in many ways sets Americans free.

For health reform has been a hugely liberating experience for millions. It means that workers don’t have to fear that quitting a job with a large company will mean loss of health coverage, and that entrepreneurs don’t have to fear striking out on their own. It means that those 20 million people who gained coverage don’t have to fear financial ruin if they get sick — or unnecessary death if they can’t afford treatment. For there is no real question that Obamacare is saving tens of thousands of lives every year.

So why do Republicans hate Obamacare so much? It’s not because they have better ideas; as we’ve seen over the past few weeks, they’re coming up empty-handed on the “replace” part of “repeal and replace.” It’s not, I’m sorry to say, because they are deeply committed to Americans’ right to buy the insurance policy of their choice.

No, mainly they hate Obamacare for two reasons: It demonstrates that the government can make people’s lives better, and it’s paid for in large part with taxes on the wealthy. Their overriding goal is to make those taxes go away. And if getting those taxes cut means that quite a few people end up dying, remember: freedom!
Click to expand...

Krugman if incapable of writing a NYTimes article without sneaking in a piece of shameless flaming partisan rhetoric. Krugman just got done explaining that the fundamental necessity underlying this law is to force young healthy people who may not need or want expensive insurance to nonetheless pay expensive prices to support the older and sicker people. So the "taxes" are on the young and healthy, who tend not to be rich.

It seems like a flaming liberal NYT editor is given final edit rights on Krugman articles so that some asinine left wing Media Matters-esque talking points can be sprinkled in.
 
Last edited:
Porkuloss said:
Maybe fix this:
What The Antitrust Exemption For Health Insurers Means : NPR

Or is that bit of anti-free market collusion actually constitutional and we should all just suck up and pay?
Click to expand...

There are some places where it's conceivable no insurance company would sell health insurance, because virtually no one there would buy it at prices they'd have to pay. Adverse selection can create "death spirals" that causes the insurance market in that area to collapse.

Further, the new law mandates what the insurance company sells, mandates everyone be its customer, and subsidizes most of those customers in its purchase, and mandates 80%+ of its revenues are paid out in claims or rebates, effectively a profit cap. So the health insurance industry is already a de facto wing of government, as a result of these anti-free market rules. Government has natural monopoly power.
 
Neomalthusian said:
There are some places where it's conceivable no insurance company would sell health insurance, because virtually no one there would buy it at prices they'd have to pay. Adverse selection can create "death spirals" that causes the insurance market in that area to collapse.

Further, the new law mandates what the insurance company sells, mandates everyone be its customer, and subsidizes most of those customers in its purchase, and mandates 80%+ of its revenues are paid out in claims or rebates, effectively a profit cap. So the health insurance industry is already a de facto wing of government, as a result of these anti-free market rules. Government has natural monopoly power.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with what you wrote. Nothing like the ACA can be done in the U.S. because when legislation is written, all of the "stakeholders" get in and make sure the favoring legislative elements of the system that they previously bought and paid legislators for are preserved of expanded. Worst case is something like Medicare-D where congress just asks the lobbyists to write the bill.
 
Porkuloss said:
I don't disagree with what you wrote. Nothing like the ACA can be done in the U.S. because when legislation is written, all of the "stakeholders" get in and make sure the favoring legislative elements of the system that they previously bought and paid legislators for are preserved of expanded. Worst case is something like Medicare-D where congress just asks the lobbyists to write the bill.
Click to expand...

Monopoly power should not exist in society unless it's basically the government itself. Government is usually the monopoly-provider of public goods and services in society and to go along with that monopoly power there needs to be independent oversight to make sure that monopoly power isn't being used to leverage inefficient levels of profit or waste for/by government employees and contractors. The things that aren't provided by the government monopoly are "private goods and services" and should be competitive, and government's only role should be to make sure it is kept competitive and that monopolies do not arise.

May seem tangential to get all conceptual/philosophical, but health care and insurance are in this gray area between public and private and have been for a long time, and it's become a true cluster****. Taking stock of all the laws that entitle various people to various kinds of health care, it's essentially the case that health care is by law a public good, but we have vast swaths of the country that are still clinging desperately to the concept of health care as a private good/service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom