Krugman Bawls For Socialized Medicine And Suggests No Way To Pay For It.

We are always poised and ready to examine t he latest maudlin plea for bigger government and higher taxes. We are never disappointed as this is the only agenda the Walter Duranty Papers[1] has ever had. Usually, we are presented with the ‘facts’ from the New York Times’s illustrious non-economist and the conclusion is always higher taxes.  For a bit of gamesmanship he might want to make it a game to guess the outcome after a ‘presentation of the facts” and some ‘analysis.” No. Just grunt and grab like a mugger frantic for a fix.  Raise taxes no matter what the reason or outcome.

Today, we are treated to yet another maudlin screed by Paul Krugman.   As always we will brace for the next round of the ubiquitous tautological essay series using fear-based economics. We recently were privileged to read about his bubble mania economics and new tax hikes. Adding on more taxes is never a problem for the far left because that is all they have—your money.

In a new lament entitled Can It Happen Here?[2] By PAUL KRUGMAN we read:

“The draft Democratic Party platform that was sent out last week puts health care reform front and center. “If one thing came through in the platform hearings,” says the document, “it was that Democrats are united around a commitment to provide every American access to affordable, comprehensive health care.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes. This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise noted. ]

This is a political slogan and, as such, contains several ringers. The first is ‘access’ as the governments of Not-so-great-Britain and the Lesser-Canada have severely limited access in their systems. Canada rations blood tests and more and is losing its best doctors. For the reasons of cost control, a massive bureaucracy and wrecking efficiency, the access is now limited. This also obviates a discussion on the word comprehensive unless you think that some witch doctor who waves   feathers at you as you wait in line for 20 hours is giving your some portion of your entitled healthcare when it comes your way. But the big honker here is the unfathomable word ‘affordable.’ Just for the record, the average individual cost per person per month is $437 before we pile on the free abortions and free everything for illegal aliens.

Now, we have heard this song from Krugman before in articles such as Voodoo Health Economics[3]and similar screeds.

From an earlier blog by this author we can requote Krugman:[4]

““It’s about time someone said that and, more generally, made the case that Mr. McCain’s approach to health care is based on voodoo economics — not the supply-side voodoo that claims that cutting taxes increases revenues (though Mr. McCain says that, too), but the equally foolish claim, refuted by all available evidence, that the magic of the marketplace can produce cheap health care for everyone.” [Emphasis is mine in color and such in all quotes in this article.][5]

Notice the tax cutting sputum that springs forth like crab grass in the spring? Let us ignore market forces. Just raise taxes.  Notice the incoherent slogan against tax cuts—the defining element of phony economics? We shall read more about this. We were given, at the time of the Voodoo Screed, a number of about $349 per person, but the actual number is closer to $437. But, let us have some fun with arithmetic here:

“The politics of guaranteed care are also easy, at least in one sense: if the Democrats do manage to establish a system of universal coverage, the nation will love it.”

This also works for crack smoking and taking Black Studies courses at Princeton. The Brits and Canadians and Russians do not love theirs.

“The Massachusetts plan has come in for a lot of criticism. It includes individual mandates — that is, people are required to buy coverage, even if they’d prefer to take their chances. And its costs are running much higher than expected, mainly because it turns out that there were more people without insurance than anyone realized.

Yet recent polls show overwhelming support for the plan — support that has grown stronger since it went into effect, despite the new system’s teething troubles. Once a system of universal health coverage exists, it seems, people want to keep it.”

Who did you poll? Where are the cost numbers? Once addicted to crack or heroin, it seems, people want to keep hooting and shooting  it.” It has wild cost overruns and it depends on who you ask as to who is offering ‘overwhelming’ support.[6] Ask the taxpayers if you can find any in the state.

“Massachusetts is in a pickle that could soon spread nationwide: How to make sure everyone can afford to buy health insurance. The state recently mandated insurance for all, but is finding it tougher than expected to bring down insurance premiums and copays to make coverage affordable.” -- Mass. Health Gurus Call for Revivial [sic]of Managed Care

Posted by Jacob Goldstein. [7]

Isn’t that just the same word Krugman used above? Now, we find his MA model is not exactly affordable? Gee, what is happening here?

“But it’s better to have an imperfect universal health care plan than none at all — and the only way to get a universal health care plan passed soon is to inoculate it against Harry-and-Louise-type claims that people will be forced into plans “designed by government bureaucrats.”—Krugman.

 Maybe it is better to have AIDS than cancer too, depending. Who says it is better? Are we to hear that failure is fine if liberal Democrats like the idea and the costs are ignored? That makes liberal sense. Maybe we can redact history and show that the War on Poverty was a success since the Democrats liked it and the poor lost yet again. Yes, that is what the liberals are saying: Like a crack addict crawling out of the gutter to pander for money for just one more puff, the liberals want this more than anything else. They are addicted to the tax revenues and cannot give them up.

“One more thing: if we do get real health care reform, a lot of people will owe a debt of gratitude to none other than John Edwards. When Mr. Edwards dropped out of the presidential race, I credited him with making universal health care a “possible dream for the next administration.” Mr. Edwards’s political career is over — but perhaps he and his family can take some solace from the fact that his party is still trying to make that dream come true.”

Of course, John Edwards is the heel[8]who was screwing some dizzy pixel pumper and lied about it for months and months while his wife loses a battle with cancer. Where are the happy ones here? His mistress could have a free paternity test by Mass standards and she rejects this?[9] Edwards is a liar and parasite and was forced to confess like Clinton when presented with facts and evidence that refuted his lies. Where was the reporting of this by the New York Times? Here:[10]

“If there is such a thing as good timing for disclosing these matters, Mr. Edwards’s timing was, indeed, good. In addition to coverage of the Olympics, he also picked an evening when Mr. Obama was leaving town. The Democratic candidate can muse over his response for a week while on the beach in Hawaii.” NYT Aug 9.[11]

Can it get any sleazier than this? We have some wimpish plea for more tax money for some phony health care system that ‘might be imperfect,’ but we need it anyway, and the NYT analysis here omits any discussion of illegal aliens [O’Bozo[12] wants that] and the credit for such a potential failure goes to John Edwards. Mass found out that they had an ‘unexpectedly’ large application for HC in their state [poor planning, a typical liberal attribute] and Krugman doesn’t even give a cost per person in this pitiful piece. But Paul Krugman does praise John Edwards??!!

What is the cost?? Is it above $500 or $600 per person per month yet?? Why not $1000?

How pitiful. How very pitiful and we read these papers and wondered if a parasite like John Edwards was ‘presidential material’ and was ever ‘qualified?’ He is a typical liberal.

We cannot afford socialized medicine. The cost would soar from about $400 to about $800 and the illegal aliens would flock in from Canada and Mexico and parts south and by air, land and sea in every push cart, trundle and broken down bus to get her and get some freebies. They could bring along family and they could go on welfare while the treatments are ongoing and have a few anchor babies in the interim. Presto! Citizenship and more benefits!!

That sounds like the real New York Times—Marxist to the core.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com