"...a lot of people — around 16 million, the administration estimates, a picture confirmed by independent sources — do indeed have health insurance who otherwise wouldn’t." Such as Senator Ted Cruz, who has accepted the subsidy provided by the ACA. Talk about two-faced!
58
Would that your own colleague David Brooks would finally admit that he has picked the wrong side. (In a piece from a couple of weeks ago, he almost did.)
23
This opinion is quite over the top, even for Krugman.
"The Affordable Care Act has been a remarkable success."
For the insurance companies, this is true. For people who are poor, this is partially true. For the vast majority of America, this is not true.
Hillary's everyday Americans are paying more for worse policies while the cost of medical services is rising. Furthermore, having to fight for benefits remains a constant feature.
"President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who pushed the Affordable Care Act through despite total opposition from the G.O.P., have a lot to be proud of."
Really?
Their primary argument in favor of ACA was that it was a Republican idea. In other words, even they have to admit that what they sold was the Republican health care plan. Force everyone to buy worthless insurance policies, and backstop the whole corrupt scheme with the Treasury. One of the ten greatest scams in American history.
These Democrat "leaders" got snookered. The Republican tricked them into passing their plan, and they also set the Democrats to take the blame for its unpopularity.
No wonder there's a lot of spin going on. It is, however, sickening that major media is now just old fashioned propaganda. The so-called liberal pretense of this machine talks haughtily about the Fox news echo chamber, but what is the NY Times, if not the same thing?
"The Affordable Care Act has been a remarkable success."
For the insurance companies, this is true. For people who are poor, this is partially true. For the vast majority of America, this is not true.
Hillary's everyday Americans are paying more for worse policies while the cost of medical services is rising. Furthermore, having to fight for benefits remains a constant feature.
"President Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, who pushed the Affordable Care Act through despite total opposition from the G.O.P., have a lot to be proud of."
Really?
Their primary argument in favor of ACA was that it was a Republican idea. In other words, even they have to admit that what they sold was the Republican health care plan. Force everyone to buy worthless insurance policies, and backstop the whole corrupt scheme with the Treasury. One of the ten greatest scams in American history.
These Democrat "leaders" got snookered. The Republican tricked them into passing their plan, and they also set the Democrats to take the blame for its unpopularity.
No wonder there's a lot of spin going on. It is, however, sickening that major media is now just old fashioned propaganda. The so-called liberal pretense of this machine talks haughtily about the Fox news echo chamber, but what is the NY Times, if not the same thing?
13
Paul Krugman is the perfect sanity confirming- voice of our time. He is the Mike Royko of cultural political observation, with a nobel laureate in economics to give his voice validity. But, as he points out, all this is lost on the insane far right and their gullible followers.
53
Did President Obama ever credit Romney for his efforts in Massachusetts? Of course not! This article is another example of revisionist history and double standards by the liberal elite.
I appreciate the tongue in cheek headline, but obviously Mitt could free himself by doing one round of Sunday talk shows. He chooses to remain in denial of Romneycare, I guess, because he prefers to remain influential in the current Republican Party.
11
Okay, even at the price of Free, we don't want no Mitt Romney.
7
I have never forgotten, Robert Nozick, the late Harvard philosopher, argued that taking any money against a person's will, in the form of taxes, to help others was immoral. Nozick was one of the intellectual gurus of the rise of the Reagan Republicans.
16
" Not perfect: despite subsidies, policies are still hard for some to afford, and deductibles and co-pays can be onerous. "
and that IS the problem with "government-let contracts". The taxpayer foots the bill one way or another, and is indeed the major reason that we need NATIONAL HEALTH CARE , one payer system.
we pay through the nose for toilet seats and hammers, and jets and trucks and shoes simply because the trough is open to all-comers who provide the "goods" for a PRICE. The GOP grouses about the government bit how much money would those GOP businesses lose if the "government were to go away?"
The other thing that rankles is if the government is so bad that the elected members of that government want to shut it down, why don't they just resign now, help start the process and save the taxpayer both the worry and cost of running that government with the traitors that they are?
and that IS the problem with "government-let contracts". The taxpayer foots the bill one way or another, and is indeed the major reason that we need NATIONAL HEALTH CARE , one payer system.
we pay through the nose for toilet seats and hammers, and jets and trucks and shoes simply because the trough is open to all-comers who provide the "goods" for a PRICE. The GOP grouses about the government bit how much money would those GOP businesses lose if the "government were to go away?"
The other thing that rankles is if the government is so bad that the elected members of that government want to shut it down, why don't they just resign now, help start the process and save the taxpayer both the worry and cost of running that government with the traitors that they are?
15
The ACA is an unmitigated failure. It was a lie from the beginning. It was 'supposed' to lower the costs of healthcare. Of course that was never the intent. Obama told insurance they could have their money, the legislation was written that way. But the insurers told Congress that to take on millions of new members whose health was unknown would require high premiums and out-of pocket spending. Obama and the Dems were good with that as they would subsidize millions of people - anyone making less than 4x the poverty level.
But let's step back for a second. Over 80% of Americans were insured under the 'old way.' Low premiums, no out of pocket. The 20% that were not insured were made up of those that didn't want to pay for it (young, healthy) and those that felt they didn't want to pay for it (too much coming out of their pay). The latter could have easily paid for catastrophic insurance (<$25 a month), but chose not to. They didn't have to as they could go to the ER and get free care.
Now, the majority have seen ridiculous increases (mine are over 3x what they were just 8 years ago) and those that were clambering for care have signed up, are subsidized, and still cancel as they don't want to pay anything. Guess care isn't important, or perhaps it's still too expensive.
Funny, people will buy cars and houses and TVs and cable and all kinds of 'stuff' but are infuriated when they have to buy insurance. ACA is a joke, and has hurt care for most of us.
But let's step back for a second. Over 80% of Americans were insured under the 'old way.' Low premiums, no out of pocket. The 20% that were not insured were made up of those that didn't want to pay for it (young, healthy) and those that felt they didn't want to pay for it (too much coming out of their pay). The latter could have easily paid for catastrophic insurance (<$25 a month), but chose not to. They didn't have to as they could go to the ER and get free care.
Now, the majority have seen ridiculous increases (mine are over 3x what they were just 8 years ago) and those that were clambering for care have signed up, are subsidized, and still cancel as they don't want to pay anything. Guess care isn't important, or perhaps it's still too expensive.
Funny, people will buy cars and houses and TVs and cable and all kinds of 'stuff' but are infuriated when they have to buy insurance. ACA is a joke, and has hurt care for most of us.
7
Here is what Professor Krugman and many progressives leave out.
1) Yes Obamacare has allowed 16 million americans obtain insurance that they couldn't get before. However there are millions of others who have to pay for that. There are no free lunches. My premiums have skyrocketed thanks to the affordable care act. No I cannot get subsidies. I am too "rich" for that. i earn between 50-100k a year working for those evil wall st firms. But am I really rich? Well after you deduct my health costs, taxes ,& social security how much do i take home? Oh and do I get food stamps? So whats my net income compared to a McDonalds worker? About the same. Its funny how progressives only care about the low income earners and not the struggling middle class,
2) Has the rise in healthcare costs slowed down? Yes. Now insurance companies and certianlly those under obamacare payout less to doctors? So Whats the results? Well I recently went to sign up at dr's office. He has two options. Options #1 just usie your reguar insurance with copays etc.. Option # 2, An elite health plus plan. If I pay him $155 a month on top of billing my insurnace I can get personalized care. I get after work hours access to drs, less wait times, the dr's cell number and e-mail address. So basiclly its a two tier system. If I pay I get good care otherwise crappy care. I don't blame the dr. He can't make a living from insurance payouts so he must think out of the box.
1) Yes Obamacare has allowed 16 million americans obtain insurance that they couldn't get before. However there are millions of others who have to pay for that. There are no free lunches. My premiums have skyrocketed thanks to the affordable care act. No I cannot get subsidies. I am too "rich" for that. i earn between 50-100k a year working for those evil wall st firms. But am I really rich? Well after you deduct my health costs, taxes ,& social security how much do i take home? Oh and do I get food stamps? So whats my net income compared to a McDonalds worker? About the same. Its funny how progressives only care about the low income earners and not the struggling middle class,
2) Has the rise in healthcare costs slowed down? Yes. Now insurance companies and certianlly those under obamacare payout less to doctors? So Whats the results? Well I recently went to sign up at dr's office. He has two options. Options #1 just usie your reguar insurance with copays etc.. Option # 2, An elite health plus plan. If I pay him $155 a month on top of billing my insurnace I can get personalized care. I get after work hours access to drs, less wait times, the dr's cell number and e-mail address. So basiclly its a two tier system. If I pay I get good care otherwise crappy care. I don't blame the dr. He can't make a living from insurance payouts so he must think out of the box.
6
Great last line! The Know-nothing Party, indeed.
4
Try as I might, I can't bring myself to feel sorry for a guy who makes 200 times as much as me and pays a lower effective federal tax rate.
28
When I read, “81 percent of likely Republican caucus-goers say…” I ask why are we treating polling a group of “caucus-goers”, or party insiders equal to polling a random group of US voters in a truly independent survey?
Brings to mind the early 1800s and the British age of the “Rotten Borough”. How over time the electorate became a small, incestuous group of insiders. Any service to the greater good was non-existent, because protecting a powerful group of insider’s interests becomes paramount. Know-nothing political rhetoric comes to power in an attempt to distract the public, and know-nothing candidates are figureheads for powerful people who want to bend the rule of law to their will.
Most of us never thought we’d live to see the bad old days of know-nothing politics return. After all we supposedly live in a modern, highly developed democratic nation. Can society have new, smart technologies and old fashioned corrupt politics? The answer has to be, “Yes!”
Brings to mind the early 1800s and the British age of the “Rotten Borough”. How over time the electorate became a small, incestuous group of insiders. Any service to the greater good was non-existent, because protecting a powerful group of insider’s interests becomes paramount. Know-nothing political rhetoric comes to power in an attempt to distract the public, and know-nothing candidates are figureheads for powerful people who want to bend the rule of law to their will.
Most of us never thought we’d live to see the bad old days of know-nothing politics return. After all we supposedly live in a modern, highly developed democratic nation. Can society have new, smart technologies and old fashioned corrupt politics? The answer has to be, “Yes!”
11
It is true that the right wing cannot bear the idea of someone getting something that they did not earn. No matter how needy, how poor nor how young they may be ; they do not want tax dollars being given away to anyone. And there is a large faction in congress that follows this bizarre ideology.
8
It's not so much the Republican right doesn't care what happens to "Those People" - okay, they do begrudge anything anybody else gets - but the main thing is the right, especially, it seems, those in the West, do not like anybody telling them what to do, such as buying themselves health insurance - no way, no how. That, I think, is what they mean by all their fulminating about "freedom" and "liberty": appropriating terms used 250 years ago in a very different context to express the same sort of ideas most 13-years-old do when throwing a tantrum: You're not the boss of me!
Yesterday at a grocery store in CA's hi desert, I saw a parked HumVee with a decal of an assault weapon on the back and a line of text that read something like this: "Give me Liberty, and if you don't, I'll just stand up with my guns and take it." What do you think that means today, compared to in the day of George III? They're anarchists?
It means the base of the GOP would prefer to use gun violence to remain selfish and "independent" than to realize we're all in this together. As I say, like an adolescent, though most of them are well old enough to know better by now.
Yesterday at a grocery store in CA's hi desert, I saw a parked HumVee with a decal of an assault weapon on the back and a line of text that read something like this: "Give me Liberty, and if you don't, I'll just stand up with my guns and take it." What do you think that means today, compared to in the day of George III? They're anarchists?
It means the base of the GOP would prefer to use gun violence to remain selfish and "independent" than to realize we're all in this together. As I say, like an adolescent, though most of them are well old enough to know better by now.
27
On anything...the Republicans have yet to be caught red-handed telling the truth. Why would the PP&ACA's far, far less than dismal failure be any different?
5
Romney may have loved his family; that's admirable to a point. But the Mormon world is seriously tribal, based on an essentially Calvinist view of the world and salvation: you are either in or you are, eternally, out, damned. Any person who takes such positions seriously is not fit to hold public office in America, and must not be permitted to do so. Such positions violate every tenet on which the Constitution and the country was founded. Personally, I found Romney the most dangerous possible presidential candidate of my 70-year lifetime, way beyond the criminal Nixon or the halfwit Reagan. I have never felt an ounce of sympathy for him.
26
Obamacare is a miracle happened in this political environment. At worst it is a great step in the right direction. One hopes regular folks would stop harping about the details!
10
It is all small steps towards what will happen-Universal Health care. Medicare works, always has, its cheaper, it has more controls . 60% of health care by medicare or VA already.
9
Other nations’ long accepted H/C systems, with citizen benefits put 1st and accepted even by rw parties, are not even on the table for discussion in the US.
Americans don’t realize how abnormal this is to not even consider the public option and regulation of insurance and drug prices. Instead of our govt regulating corporations, the corporations regulate the govt. This is never cited in a Krugman column.
Oh, no, not Romney again! Don’t we have enough extremists in our CURRENT campaign? Romney hardly matters, yet suddenly K brings him back. Does he need still more Repub villains to make us think the Dems are just the solution? This way he avoids holding the establishment Dems to the policies we badly need to solve our problems. This is how our country has moved to the right, lowering our standards of what govt owes to citizens.
Ok, PK, don't worry, we WILL vote for HIllary. Where else are we going to go? And just maybe she'll live up to what we need. Now please get off those mean rw Gop crazies, your favorite topic. Start analyzing the Dem candidate policies pro/con....isn't this the function of a Nobel economist columnist so concerned about economic inequality--supposedly?
Americans don’t realize how abnormal this is to not even consider the public option and regulation of insurance and drug prices. Instead of our govt regulating corporations, the corporations regulate the govt. This is never cited in a Krugman column.
Oh, no, not Romney again! Don’t we have enough extremists in our CURRENT campaign? Romney hardly matters, yet suddenly K brings him back. Does he need still more Repub villains to make us think the Dems are just the solution? This way he avoids holding the establishment Dems to the policies we badly need to solve our problems. This is how our country has moved to the right, lowering our standards of what govt owes to citizens.
Ok, PK, don't worry, we WILL vote for HIllary. Where else are we going to go? And just maybe she'll live up to what we need. Now please get off those mean rw Gop crazies, your favorite topic. Start analyzing the Dem candidate policies pro/con....isn't this the function of a Nobel economist columnist so concerned about economic inequality--supposedly?
8
The “free” market as constituted by the Republicans is a market that if deregulated solves all problems but has instead created problems. Global warming is a prime example. But when it comes to healthcare what a mess. Shouldn’t the free market be competing and American healthcare prices out preform all other industrial nations? American healthcare cost twice as much as other industrial nations with poorer outcomes.
For a family of four healthcare insurance costs $16,000. At half that cost it’s $8,000 a year and over a thirty-year period that’s $240,000 enough to buy a home in my neighborhood.
And if the minimum wage had kept up with the economic growth of the nation since Reagan it would be $18 an hour so $20,000 a year is being withheld from the minimum wage worker. The free market couldn’t tolerate labor unions keeping those wages growing with the economy. That’s how a political party creates their class of “moochers.” I can’t imagine what the middle class has lost in wages.
Of course those insurance premiums and lost wages redistributed a lot of wealth to the wealthy, the “job creators,”-- but no living wage jobs. When the rich got their hands on the money they gripped it so hard it didn’t trickle down. Whoever said money would trickle down it’s not water and who would believe an idea like that? Republican public relation’s campaigns, opinion news and corporate political gifts are the only things that keep this ship called “Nonsense” afloat.
For a family of four healthcare insurance costs $16,000. At half that cost it’s $8,000 a year and over a thirty-year period that’s $240,000 enough to buy a home in my neighborhood.
And if the minimum wage had kept up with the economic growth of the nation since Reagan it would be $18 an hour so $20,000 a year is being withheld from the minimum wage worker. The free market couldn’t tolerate labor unions keeping those wages growing with the economy. That’s how a political party creates their class of “moochers.” I can’t imagine what the middle class has lost in wages.
Of course those insurance premiums and lost wages redistributed a lot of wealth to the wealthy, the “job creators,”-- but no living wage jobs. When the rich got their hands on the money they gripped it so hard it didn’t trickle down. Whoever said money would trickle down it’s not water and who would believe an idea like that? Republican public relation’s campaigns, opinion news and corporate political gifts are the only things that keep this ship called “Nonsense” afloat.
12
"’Millions more would be insured if Republican-controlled states weren’t refusing to expand Medicaid (even though the federal government would pay the costs)..."
In fairness, please remember that the federal subsidy for Medicaid is scheduled to decline in future years. It's not complete reimbursement indefinitely. At some point the state legislatures will be picking up more of the tab. For those who believe that low taxes are better for the economy than having a healthy workforce, this aspect of the ACA is enough of a Fig leaf to cover their opposition in the state houses.
In fairness, please remember that the federal subsidy for Medicaid is scheduled to decline in future years. It's not complete reimbursement indefinitely. At some point the state legislatures will be picking up more of the tab. For those who believe that low taxes are better for the economy than having a healthy workforce, this aspect of the ACA is enough of a Fig leaf to cover their opposition in the state houses.
2
It really is sad. He's 68, as rich as any man could hope to be and he's run his last election, and yet he still feels the need to toe a party line. The hard right may have cost him the Presidency. McCain too. It pushed Cantor out of office and put Boehner in a position where he feels the need to resign. Yet not one of these men has really spoken out against it.
11
Typo alert: " But most people enrolled under Obamacare report high satisfaction with their coverage, which is hugely better than simply not being uninsured."
2
Krugman rationalizes...”Insurance premiums in Obamacare’s first two years were well below predictions. It looks as if there will be a partial rebound in 2016, but it’s still cheaper than expected. And over all, health care spending has slowed dramatically.”
Cheaper, slowed, partial etc? Please. The US h/c costs soar above that of any other country. This is never mentioned in a Krugman column lest it reflect badly on establishment Dems, even if they're better than the rw gop. Our taxes subsidize medical corporate profits, vs other countries who regulate corporate medical profits. End of story.
See last week’s Times editorial that with Obamacare: “a lot of people who bought insurance policies earlier this year were forced to drop out, often because they couldn’t afford the premiums.”
In other countries nobody ‘drops out’. All are covered. States aren’t exempt due to whim of governors. And the grandparents of today’s youth were covered. Americans who, over years, have died or been disabled in the US would be alive today, as breadwinners of their families, avoiding poverty and bankruptcy, if they’d been born in other nations.
What plagued millions of Americans over decades, citizens abroad weren’t forced to endure. Simply b/c they accept that govt has a duty to it’s citizens, not just to corporate profits.
A perfect topic for a Krugman column, but we’ll never see it.
Cheaper, slowed, partial etc? Please. The US h/c costs soar above that of any other country. This is never mentioned in a Krugman column lest it reflect badly on establishment Dems, even if they're better than the rw gop. Our taxes subsidize medical corporate profits, vs other countries who regulate corporate medical profits. End of story.
See last week’s Times editorial that with Obamacare: “a lot of people who bought insurance policies earlier this year were forced to drop out, often because they couldn’t afford the premiums.”
In other countries nobody ‘drops out’. All are covered. States aren’t exempt due to whim of governors. And the grandparents of today’s youth were covered. Americans who, over years, have died or been disabled in the US would be alive today, as breadwinners of their families, avoiding poverty and bankruptcy, if they’d been born in other nations.
What plagued millions of Americans over decades, citizens abroad weren’t forced to endure. Simply b/c they accept that govt has a duty to it’s citizens, not just to corporate profits.
A perfect topic for a Krugman column, but we’ll never see it.
3
For some reason, publicans seem to hate people and the environment.
4
The sociopathic Mitt Romney is watching Jeb Bush's decline and Marco Rubio's rise like a hawk. The Republican Party may have to increase his meds to keep him out of the race. As a democratic progressive, however, I welcome a Romney candidacy because it would increase the odds that another Democrat will be moving into the White House in January 2017.
Why?
Jeb Bush's failure to catch on can be traced to a major political phenomenon taking place right before our eyes: many red state working class (assuming they have a job) voters who have automatically voted Republican are starting to understand their economic interests are better served by the Democratic Party.
That polling data has recently focused Bernie Sanders on winning over those voters. See Sanders interview on Real Time With Bill Maher. Imagine that, a self described democratic socialist from Vermont is campaigning for votes in red state America.
Why?
Jeb Bush's failure to catch on can be traced to a major political phenomenon taking place right before our eyes: many red state working class (assuming they have a job) voters who have automatically voted Republican are starting to understand their economic interests are better served by the Democratic Party.
That polling data has recently focused Bernie Sanders on winning over those voters. See Sanders interview on Real Time With Bill Maher. Imagine that, a self described democratic socialist from Vermont is campaigning for votes in red state America.
3
Republican Flight of Reason
(with deep apologies to John Gillespie Magee)
"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of reason
And danced the skies on spite-filled wings;
Inward I’ve climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
of spit-ball clouds, — and done a thousand things
You couldn't find reason for — lied and propagandized and swam
Deep in the darkened mendacity. Hov’ring there,
I’ve chased the opposite of truth, and flung
My spiteful mind through baseless claims of hot air....
Up, up the long, deranged, burning ball of vitriol,
I’ve topped the wind-swept masses with easy disinformation.
Where never reason, or even logic flew —
And, while with darkened, petty mind I've trod
The depths of lying to an entire nation for golden lace,
- Put out my hand, and touched the face of the God of Mammon."
Party First: Country Last: GOP 2015
(with deep apologies to John Gillespie Magee)
"Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of reason
And danced the skies on spite-filled wings;
Inward I’ve climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
of spit-ball clouds, — and done a thousand things
You couldn't find reason for — lied and propagandized and swam
Deep in the darkened mendacity. Hov’ring there,
I’ve chased the opposite of truth, and flung
My spiteful mind through baseless claims of hot air....
Up, up the long, deranged, burning ball of vitriol,
I’ve topped the wind-swept masses with easy disinformation.
Where never reason, or even logic flew —
And, while with darkened, petty mind I've trod
The depths of lying to an entire nation for golden lace,
- Put out my hand, and touched the face of the God of Mammon."
Party First: Country Last: GOP 2015
48
"Not surprisingly, then, Mr. Romney quickly tried to walk his comments back, claiming that Obamacare is very different from Romneycare ..."
Don't be too hard on Romney. Hillary Clinton has now disavowed the TPP which she previously declared the "gold standard".
Why? Because she needs to pander to some extent in order to get elected. No politician can realistically get elected if they don't pander a bit. So by all means hold their feet to the fire, but don't pass moral judgment.
Don't be too hard on Romney. Hillary Clinton has now disavowed the TPP which she previously declared the "gold standard".
Why? Because she needs to pander to some extent in order to get elected. No politician can realistically get elected if they don't pander a bit. So by all means hold their feet to the fire, but don't pass moral judgment.
1
Mr. Bernanke has it right. No-nothing-ism on guns and climate change, too. And corporate America goes along with this by supporting their candidates.
2
Kicking Romney around just takes our eye off the ball.
The message we get from our NYT liberal is that Obamacare was the best possible, given our politics, so let’s be grateful it’s not worse. Millions of people left out is a worthwhile price to pay.
The business/profit as 1st requirement of ACA makes it impossible for the US to come up to par with the rest of the civilized nations with reasonable health care for all.
What low standards we have. Our liberal Krugman should criticize a , a repub lite h/c plan, that funnels our tax money to profits, not to our care. See NYT editorial re drop outs due to high premiums. Americans deserve better.
ACA is only good after our previous system, atrocious by 20th c standards of other nations. Suppose Obama had not proudly signed ACA, but pushed for, not even single payer, but at least some regulation of medical prices by govt? As other nations do? Suppose liberal opinion writers held the govt to a higher standard?
This in the land of the land of ‘equal protection of the laws’ and the bill of rights. Big money in elections after Citizens United makes h/c for all even harder to achieve.
We pay the most for drugs worldwide b/c lobbyists push congress to not let drugs go generic. Krugman won’t cite how other countries regulate drug and insurance prices. And use public funds for elections, to insulate lawmakers from big money pressure, freeing them up to work for citizens. Easier to write columns knocking rw Gop loonies around.
The message we get from our NYT liberal is that Obamacare was the best possible, given our politics, so let’s be grateful it’s not worse. Millions of people left out is a worthwhile price to pay.
The business/profit as 1st requirement of ACA makes it impossible for the US to come up to par with the rest of the civilized nations with reasonable health care for all.
What low standards we have. Our liberal Krugman should criticize a , a repub lite h/c plan, that funnels our tax money to profits, not to our care. See NYT editorial re drop outs due to high premiums. Americans deserve better.
ACA is only good after our previous system, atrocious by 20th c standards of other nations. Suppose Obama had not proudly signed ACA, but pushed for, not even single payer, but at least some regulation of medical prices by govt? As other nations do? Suppose liberal opinion writers held the govt to a higher standard?
This in the land of the land of ‘equal protection of the laws’ and the bill of rights. Big money in elections after Citizens United makes h/c for all even harder to achieve.
We pay the most for drugs worldwide b/c lobbyists push congress to not let drugs go generic. Krugman won’t cite how other countries regulate drug and insurance prices. And use public funds for elections, to insulate lawmakers from big money pressure, freeing them up to work for citizens. Easier to write columns knocking rw Gop loonies around.
4
From this op-ed: "Sometimes I find myself feeling sorry for Mitt Romney. No, seriously."
As Johnny Carson used to say to promote weak comedy material: "Buy the premise, buy the bit."
Take my wife... Please!
'Romneycare' was the least of Romney's problems as a candidate. He was a wooden elitist caught on camera denouncing 47% of Americans while talking to rich people. He put his dog on top of his car while on vacation. We are just scratching the surface here.
Ah, the pressures of putting out a twice weekly column...
Next: investigate health insurance company price gouging and soaring profits under the canard of "increased premiums due to Obamacare."
4
The most dishonest, unseemly part of Krugman's passive aggressive hatchet job is the tortured use of the Obama talking point that has bludgeoned America bloody.
If everybody likes Obamacare, praise Obama.
If everybody hates Obamacare, blame Romney.
Watching Krugman contort the written word in this way is painful. Unlike Krugman, I am a trial lawyer who respects and uses words to convey facts. As an overrated economist turned Obama cheerleader, Krugman appears addicted to strawmen and fallacy.
But I cannot shake the Obama/Krugman "death panel" who overlook huge swaths of the American middle class, suffering and now dying under the skyrocketing costs of healthcare and health insurance, all for the sake of the Affordable Care Act, a lie built on lies.
If everybody likes Obamacare, praise Obama.
If everybody hates Obamacare, blame Romney.
Watching Krugman contort the written word in this way is painful. Unlike Krugman, I am a trial lawyer who respects and uses words to convey facts. As an overrated economist turned Obama cheerleader, Krugman appears addicted to strawmen and fallacy.
But I cannot shake the Obama/Krugman "death panel" who overlook huge swaths of the American middle class, suffering and now dying under the skyrocketing costs of healthcare and health insurance, all for the sake of the Affordable Care Act, a lie built on lies.
3
I've been wondering whether there is a relationship between these two facts: (1) “Millions more would be insured if Republican-controlled states weren’t refusing to expand Medicaid” and (2) “the big Biden deal has come in below budget”.
If so, then it is at a minimum incredibly ironic that one of the initiatives by Republicans to kill Obamacare has actually boosted it by reducing its costs below projections. (On, as usual, the backs of the unfortunate.)
If so, then it is at a minimum incredibly ironic that one of the initiatives by Republicans to kill Obamacare has actually boosted it by reducing its costs below projections. (On, as usual, the backs of the unfortunate.)
2
When Ben Carson compares Obamacare to slavery he belittles the suffering of the slaves who are a part of his cultural past. Do you see anyone whipped or families broken or people dying in fields because of Obamacare? If anything families are held together because of this program and the coverage it gives. Ben Carson should be ashamed of this analogy, but he puts vicious politics ahead of the suffering of people.
10
Do copy editors get the Sunday night off? Somebody should have rewritten the sentence that ends with "hugely better than simply not being uninsured" in the eighth paragraph. He means better than being insured. Drop hugely and simply.
"The point is from the point of view" toward the end is ridiculous, and so is "instead, however."
"The point is from the point of view" toward the end is ridiculous, and so is "instead, however."
1
Mitt can never free himself from his delusions. One of the drum beats against Obama from right-wing Republicans was that he was a Birther. Mitt could have stopped that nonsense as his father George being a Mexican citizen could be classically defined as being a Birther when he was bidding to be the US president. One doesn't know how immigration policies worked more than a 100 years ago, but being White, George Romney probably could walk across the border and become a US citizen, and no questions asked. This comes to another Mitt delusion. Doesn't that in some sense make Mitt and his siblings classical anchor babies?
1
If Romney had stepped up to the plate vis-a-vis Obama-care and taken the credit that is rightfully due him, he might have won the Presidential election. His flip-flopping and lack of authenticity really hurt him in the general election. Of course, with the crazy Republican primary system, he may not have been selected as the party's candidate, which would have been sad. He deserves a lot of credit and his pandering really cost him - - both at the polls and in his personal legacy. Sad for him.
1
Given that Romney is a Mormon and that the primary tenet of the Mormon "church" is Obedience, Romney merits no more respect than any other trained animal. The only thing he's waiting for is maybe a biscuit, a pat on the head and a scratch on the belly.
2
Mr, Krugman is not correct in saying that the ACA did not hurt some people. In fact, there have been "winners and losers" under the ACA. Not sure if the whether the winners outnumber the losers, but there have indeed been losers.
3
Facts are no match for catchy slogans....
"Government isn't the solution to our problems, it is the problem" or
"The problem with socialism is that you run out of other people's money"
If slogans are too much to process, you can turn to chants... "socialized medicine!"
"Government isn't the solution to our problems, it is the problem" or
"The problem with socialism is that you run out of other people's money"
If slogans are too much to process, you can turn to chants... "socialized medicine!"
1
Dear Mr. Krugman,
I have a question about your column: You write "First of all, a lot of people — around 16 million, the administration estimates, a picture confirmed by independent sources — do indeed have health insurance who otherwise wouldn’t."
I cannot speak for the other 15,999,998 people, but in my own case, I now found myself in Obamacare without wanting to be there.
As you get your own health insurance from The New York Times, you live in something of a bubble. For those of us on the outside - small business owners - we must make our own way through the system.
For many years, my wife and I were quiet happy with a private policy from a major health insurance company. It was expensive, ($3800 a month), but we go the best coverage we could find and were quite content to pay for it.
Now, our private insurer has informed us that our old policy is 'no longer compliant with ACA', and we have 'no choice' but to go to the 'marketplace' to get coverage. They are no longer allowed, apparently, to sell us the policy we liked so much. Neither, apparently, is anyone else.
The coverage offered by 'the marketplace' does not begin to touch the coverage we had before. Not even close. Yet we seemingly have no choice. We have been forced into 'the plan', undoubtedly to enhance the pool.
So, yes, we are part of the 16 million in ACA, but believe me, it is not by choice. Our health coverage has been substantially downgraded.
I have a question about your column: You write "First of all, a lot of people — around 16 million, the administration estimates, a picture confirmed by independent sources — do indeed have health insurance who otherwise wouldn’t."
I cannot speak for the other 15,999,998 people, but in my own case, I now found myself in Obamacare without wanting to be there.
As you get your own health insurance from The New York Times, you live in something of a bubble. For those of us on the outside - small business owners - we must make our own way through the system.
For many years, my wife and I were quiet happy with a private policy from a major health insurance company. It was expensive, ($3800 a month), but we go the best coverage we could find and were quite content to pay for it.
Now, our private insurer has informed us that our old policy is 'no longer compliant with ACA', and we have 'no choice' but to go to the 'marketplace' to get coverage. They are no longer allowed, apparently, to sell us the policy we liked so much. Neither, apparently, is anyone else.
The coverage offered by 'the marketplace' does not begin to touch the coverage we had before. Not even close. Yet we seemingly have no choice. We have been forced into 'the plan', undoubtedly to enhance the pool.
So, yes, we are part of the 16 million in ACA, but believe me, it is not by choice. Our health coverage has been substantially downgraded.
3
The Republicans have moved so far Right since 2012, Willard Mitt Romney now appears in the rear view (Objects are closer than they seem) like a perfect candidate compared with the current cop of clowns. Dare I say it, the Bushes, even Dubya', and McCain are now fond memories of a time when the GOP at least presented us with a common sense viable alternative.
Today we see The Donald and The Good Doctor battling for the lead? Can you believe this? After each humiliating loss, Republicans are determined to double-down, ante-up on the Kook Factor, and hope that the next time around their brazen behavior will ensure victory, the crazier the better? Do they even begin to fathom how absolutely nutty this is? Guess not, for they're head over heels in love with The Donald and good old straight shooter Doc Carson.
By all appearances in 2016 Republicans are going all in. They honestly seem to believe they can trump Hillary by actually nominating a real Trump Card. Oh yeah, The Donald's a real card all right. The Joker.
DD
Manhattan
Today we see The Donald and The Good Doctor battling for the lead? Can you believe this? After each humiliating loss, Republicans are determined to double-down, ante-up on the Kook Factor, and hope that the next time around their brazen behavior will ensure victory, the crazier the better? Do they even begin to fathom how absolutely nutty this is? Guess not, for they're head over heels in love with The Donald and good old straight shooter Doc Carson.
By all appearances in 2016 Republicans are going all in. They honestly seem to believe they can trump Hillary by actually nominating a real Trump Card. Oh yeah, The Donald's a real card all right. The Joker.
DD
Manhattan
2
What is driving insurance and drug cost so high, and has become no longer affordable to so many ? Why are some families going bankrupt? Does anyone ever question or call for congressional investigations regarding the high cost of medical care? The almost criminal charge for some life saving drugs. Yeh, I know it's research, research etc. etc. But still....
The costs of an aspirin or a band aide in the hospital, the cost of a simple procedures - Look at your insurance statements and see the what your doctor/hospital is charging for services.
I know, I know - don't attack me just yet - just my observation - Look at your insurance statements and see what your doctor is charging for simple procedures, office visit, etc. I have nothing against wanting to make a lot of money - but it seems to me fees, costs and charges have been pushed to the limit. I knew of a man who died because he couldn't afford the cost of his life saving prescription drug . Many people today are at risk because of high cost, non -affordable drugs. Medicare cost , private insurance costs rising every year it seems - it's the consumer who pays the price of all this in so many ways.
The costs of an aspirin or a band aide in the hospital, the cost of a simple procedures - Look at your insurance statements and see the what your doctor/hospital is charging for services.
I know, I know - don't attack me just yet - just my observation - Look at your insurance statements and see what your doctor is charging for simple procedures, office visit, etc. I have nothing against wanting to make a lot of money - but it seems to me fees, costs and charges have been pushed to the limit. I knew of a man who died because he couldn't afford the cost of his life saving prescription drug . Many people today are at risk because of high cost, non -affordable drugs. Medicare cost , private insurance costs rising every year it seems - it's the consumer who pays the price of all this in so many ways.
2
As usual You have been duped by Obama care .as a practicing physician who tried to work with the "insuance "plans for Obamacare it was less than worthless intrying to provide care.endless waits for approval for proceedures and surgery . Inadequate coverage for durable medical supplies,i.e splints ,crutches erc
This is a farce to believe that this is really medical coverage. Let's give the same coverage to you and congress!!!
This is a farce to believe that this is really medical coverage. Let's give the same coverage to you and congress!!!
1
one thing I have to respect: he did not select an incompetent for his running mate in 2012.
Seriously Professor Paul?
Who cares about a corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarch quarter billionaire with a dancing horse who never served in the military-uniform of any armed American force while white and Mormon?
Who cares about a corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarch quarter billionaire with a dancing horse who never served in the military-uniform of any armed American force while white and Mormon?
3
While it is true Mitt got it right on healthcare, he still got it wrong on a lot of other things and it is hard to have sympathy for a guy who has legally taken such extreme advantage of tax laws through interest carry and use of deferred accounts to build a fortune tax free. The sad truth about Obamacare, is imagine how much better it could be if both parties worked on how to fix its current structure and extend it to more people.
Nothing makes me angrier than when words like Nazi, slavery are thrown at anything a politician doesn't like. And for a back man to lessen the suffering of his ancestors by calling available health care the worse thing since slavery is appalling. Doesn't he think Jim Crow was worse? And when a politician calls a foe a Nazi when that person has not been responsible for millions of deaths is plain mental and emotional incompetence. What is even more appalling is that so many Americans buy into this evil.
5
How many times have I heard a Republican House Member, Senator, Candidate or especially one of those GOP TV "strategists" denounce the Affordable Care Act--which they only refer to as Obamacare"? Oh, maybe a thousand times in the past six or seven years years or so. How many times have I heard a Democrat rebut those denunciations with numbers and illustrations like those in Paul Krugman's column? Maybe once or twice, but my main memories are those of Democrats distancing themselves from President Obama during the last election. There is no voice for the Democrats other than Obama. He is not only isolated by the GOP, but often by his own party.
142
No one needs to "free" Mitt Romney - he could free himself if he wanted to.
But, as the old joke goes, you've got to want to.
But, as the old joke goes, you've got to want to.
1
The problem with today's GOP is they confuse capitalism and democracy. They love to say let the markets figure things out. That's a great aphorism for selling widgets, but not great when comes to dealing with 320 million people. People are not widgets (as much as the Tea Party thinks they are).
1
Let's create two systems one single payer for the democrats and one private o for the republicans Once you sign up you can't change Since US is divided 50-50 let the FACTS WIN
2
Strange days, indeed: Paul Krugman praising Mitt Romney in print. His points are well-taken (as usual, I might add) but if this isn't a sign of the coming End of Days, I don't know what is...
"Ben Carson...has declared that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen to America since slavery."
I suppose die-hard Republicans can believe that in part because they don't really think slavery was particularly bad. In fact, if you parse the phrase as "the worst thing to happen to America since THE END of slavery" -- i.e. since the Lost Cause was definitively lost -- it even begins to make some perverse sense. Both the end of slavery and the passage of the ACA are slaps in the face of those whose vision of America is a hierarchical society in which the role of those who are unfortunate enough to be born into a lower caste is to know their place, to cheerfully serve their betters, and to be perpetually grateful for the pittance allowed to them, while looking forward to a heavenly reward.
I suppose die-hard Republicans can believe that in part because they don't really think slavery was particularly bad. In fact, if you parse the phrase as "the worst thing to happen to America since THE END of slavery" -- i.e. since the Lost Cause was definitively lost -- it even begins to make some perverse sense. Both the end of slavery and the passage of the ACA are slaps in the face of those whose vision of America is a hierarchical society in which the role of those who are unfortunate enough to be born into a lower caste is to know their place, to cheerfully serve their betters, and to be perpetually grateful for the pittance allowed to them, while looking forward to a heavenly reward.
2
Obviously, Mr. Romney would never make the cut in John F. Kennedy's Profiles in Courage!
Instead, he is more suited for the Marlon Brando role in On The Waterfront; "You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let's face it."
Instead, he is more suited for the Marlon Brando role in On The Waterfront; "You don't understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender. I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let's face it."
It's a mystery to me why Republicans don't like the ACA. They always wanted the program to be privatized, so isn't it, since the private insurance companies get all the money?
I think the Republicans hate Obama and disparage anything he does, even if it agrees with them.
I think the Republicans hate Obama and disparage anything he does, even if it agrees with them.
4
Obamacare helps a relative few at the expense of the many. I'm one of the latter, and I want to see it repealed and replaced.
Unlike the lucky "young lady in her early 40s", Medicare - following a new Obamacare-imposed rule - denied coverage for my second prostate operation (now, only one such operation is allowed coverage per lifetime) - and blamed my medical doctor for not knowing the new rule and claiming the coverage.
SHAME on Obama and his acolyte, Krugman.
I'm voting for Dr. Carson.
Unlike the lucky "young lady in her early 40s", Medicare - following a new Obamacare-imposed rule - denied coverage for my second prostate operation (now, only one such operation is allowed coverage per lifetime) - and blamed my medical doctor for not knowing the new rule and claiming the coverage.
SHAME on Obama and his acolyte, Krugman.
I'm voting for Dr. Carson.
1
Jeez.
I guess those death panels never came to fruition, did they?
I guess those death panels never came to fruition, did they?
3
I, too, feel sorry for Mitt Romney. Mitt had every material advantage life could offer. Yet, when he had the opportunity, he could not find a way to be his own man: someone able to take satisfaction in their signature accomplishments.
1
I struggle to understand why so many people who consider themselves religious and righteous - as Ben Carson surely does - willfully despise the poor, ignore their suffering, and celebrate a grossly unequal status quo that perpetuates their suppression. They profess to be Christian but seem to be pretty ignorant of Jesus - "Whatsoever you do unto the least of my brothers, that you do unto me".
Maybe they don't understand that "my brothers" includes people who don't look like them, and maybe speak a different language or worship differently or were born with a different sexual attraction or gender identity.
It's telling that the Republicans want to repeal Obamacare (50 times over in the the House of Representatives) but have no credible alternative to take its place. They are drunk on destruction and the consequences be damned, especially if they hurt Those People. What a warped and twisted set of values!
Maybe they don't understand that "my brothers" includes people who don't look like them, and maybe speak a different language or worship differently or were born with a different sexual attraction or gender identity.
It's telling that the Republicans want to repeal Obamacare (50 times over in the the House of Representatives) but have no credible alternative to take its place. They are drunk on destruction and the consequences be damned, especially if they hurt Those People. What a warped and twisted set of values!
3
Faced with the very real prospect of Donald Trump as the next President of the United States, Krugman and the faux intellectual liberals are pining for the same Mitt Romney they accused, accosted and ran from American politics.
Schadenfreude indeed.
Schadenfreude indeed.
1
Paul.....
Romney, the pragmatically successful, less bellicose, business guy, may be the elixir the GOP needs (yes, they will need hold their nose and swallow) if they have any hope of recovering from the degenerative political brain disease that is the tea party. He understands that there is a difference between anti-government and anti-governing.
Romney, the pragmatically successful, less bellicose, business guy, may be the elixir the GOP needs (yes, they will need hold their nose and swallow) if they have any hope of recovering from the degenerative political brain disease that is the tea party. He understands that there is a difference between anti-government and anti-governing.
1
Right-to-Life right-wingers have caused an untold number of deaths by refusing to extend Medicaid to the poor.
3
From this op-ed: "Sometimes I find myself feeling sorry for Mitt Romney. No, seriously."
As Johnny Carson used to say to promote weak comedy material: "Buy the premise, buy the bit."
Take my wife... Please!
'Romneycare' was the least of Romney's problems as a candidate. He was a wooden elitist caught on camera denouncing 47% of Americans while talking to rich people. He put his dog on top of his car while on vacation. We are just scratching the surface here.
Ah, the pressures of putting out a twice weekly column...
2
Apparently Krugman lives in a world where Obamacare has helped and worked for the MARJOITY. What he doesn't know or doesn't care about is the fact that it is destroying the middle class,. Since he's in the 1% he probably doesn't care about that. What the middle class received with this bill was higher cost for the policy. Higher copays and higher taxes to pay for the people that are getting it free. Thanks for nothing.
2
"over all, health care spending has slowed dramatically"
The hidden 800 pound gorilla in the room, in terms of GOP opposition to Obamacare, is the fact the Medical Community has lobbied the GOP via Heritage Action and others to kill Obamacare and kill Romneycare's positive message simply because THEY WILL MAKE LESS MONEY UNDER OBAMACARE. Already we see massive swings away from double digit medical inflation. We have caught over $100 BILLION in medicare/medicaid fraud under parts of Obamacare, and most politically motivated medical groups are forced now to serve more people with more reasonable services. The whole GOP resistance, and Ben Carson resistance (which being a surgeon he will never admit) is that they hate Obamacare simply because it forces the medical community in America to stop using medicine as a ticket to instant wealth! The greed in the medical community is what has funded the disasterous decline in quality, affordable care under the Baby Boomer generation since the 1990's simply because so many of them have entered the profession seeking money. Its the sad truth none of us can face.....and its why the media has failed to pinpoint WHY the GOP has worked so hard to spread lies against Obamacare and insuring people. Its all about money and greed and always has been, like 99% of the bad decisions we make in Washington today. People are desperate to maintain their wealth and greed at all cost.
The hidden 800 pound gorilla in the room, in terms of GOP opposition to Obamacare, is the fact the Medical Community has lobbied the GOP via Heritage Action and others to kill Obamacare and kill Romneycare's positive message simply because THEY WILL MAKE LESS MONEY UNDER OBAMACARE. Already we see massive swings away from double digit medical inflation. We have caught over $100 BILLION in medicare/medicaid fraud under parts of Obamacare, and most politically motivated medical groups are forced now to serve more people with more reasonable services. The whole GOP resistance, and Ben Carson resistance (which being a surgeon he will never admit) is that they hate Obamacare simply because it forces the medical community in America to stop using medicine as a ticket to instant wealth! The greed in the medical community is what has funded the disasterous decline in quality, affordable care under the Baby Boomer generation since the 1990's simply because so many of them have entered the profession seeking money. Its the sad truth none of us can face.....and its why the media has failed to pinpoint WHY the GOP has worked so hard to spread lies against Obamacare and insuring people. Its all about money and greed and always has been, like 99% of the bad decisions we make in Washington today. People are desperate to maintain their wealth and greed at all cost.
2
Thank you, Paul Krugman.
Would you address the concerns of those states who've rejected federal Medicare subsidies? When those federal subsidies are withdrawn, they don't want to be holding the bag for increased Medicare expenses, and I've heard this argument enough times to ask you for some clarification.
Would you address the concerns of those states who've rejected federal Medicare subsidies? When those federal subsidies are withdrawn, they don't want to be holding the bag for increased Medicare expenses, and I've heard this argument enough times to ask you for some clarification.
1
A 2009 Harvard study found that 45,000 lives were being lost annually in America due to lack of health insurance, but Obama never cites it. Even the pro-life-until-birth crowd should be impressed by that number. A family member, an acquaintance of study co-author Steffi Woolhandler, tells us Woolhandler has not come out in support of the ACA because she favors universal heath care. Talk about the best being the enemy of the good!
1
Single player please.
6
When you have one major party--the Republicans--now dedicated to the proposition that government should only work for the wealthy few at the expense of everyone else, you have a political civil war that has been raging throughout the Obama Administration. That war is being waged by a new breed of anti-government, primarily white male Southern radicals both within the Republican Party, but more importantly it has stood from "Day One" solidly against every major domestic initiative of Mr. Obama with an anti- "defund" scorched-earth policy that would rather see the government default on its debt or shutdown than provide Romneycare (or Obamacare) for the many, or a step toward peace with Iran by containing nuclear weapons proliferation, or immigration reform, or efforts to address climate change. It's a political rebellion that wants to destroy America and perhaps the world in order to save it for the few plutocrats who benefit from doing anything other than cutting their taxes and allowing them to "drill baby, drill" until we all choke to death.
8
I will never understand the American antipathy towards universal health insurance. The Vietnam and (second) Iraq wars cost over $3 trillion (and that number will only increase). Surely that's more than enough money to ensure that every man, woman and child has access to decent healthcare. It's bizarre that so many Americans continue to treat single-payer health insurance like some sort of Bolshevik plot. If you compare the US to most of the other rich, developed nations with some form of universal care, and almost all pay less per capita, and live longer and healthier lives.
21
Before I lost my job in 2008 I had excellent health care. That health care was apart of my overall compensation package as a Systems Engineer. After losing that health care, which I had had all my life I was awakened to a new reality. Before this real world experience I was a Republican through and through. I would have despised Obamacare and couldn't stand taxes because I was in the top bracket paying so much. But, I've been changed in my thinking, behavior, and actions. The amount of compassion and understanding of those in need of healthcare I understand. I believe everyone in our country should have access to affordable healthcare even if i have to contribute a little more myself. I wish everyone could taste what's it's like to be without for a period of time in their life. Romeney's comments about the 47% was so disgusting to me. Since those challenging times in my life I've been converted to a democrat.
42
Why do Republicans always have to have something happen to themselves before they decide caring about other people is maybe a good thing. The across-the-board lack of empathy and imagination is truly stunning.
1
Ben Carson, who is leading the latest polls of Iowa Republicans, has declared that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen to America since slavery; 81 percent of likely Republican caucus-goers say that this statement makes him more attractive as a candidate.
This is at once a terrifying and hilarious statement. If it weren't so scary, I would be laughing, or incredulously amazed at the level of ignorance the remark reveals. That the remark came out of the mouth of an African
American, who more than likely has ancestors who were slaves only makes it more bewildering. It seems like some deep seated self hate drives this man.
As for the 81% who are probably white, it is no surprise. It is quite obvious, given their positions of literal hatred for almost everything that would lift the people, provide for decent education, work, lives, a small measure of equality, that they are insane.
This is at once a terrifying and hilarious statement. If it weren't so scary, I would be laughing, or incredulously amazed at the level of ignorance the remark reveals. That the remark came out of the mouth of an African
American, who more than likely has ancestors who were slaves only makes it more bewildering. It seems like some deep seated self hate drives this man.
As for the 81% who are probably white, it is no surprise. It is quite obvious, given their positions of literal hatred for almost everything that would lift the people, provide for decent education, work, lives, a small measure of equality, that they are insane.
20
If the definition of success of an entitlements is simply how many people get the entitlement, no matter what the cost or impact on quality or access, then we should move forward with any entitlements we can possibly think of. Our medical care for example would drastically improve if we had doctors stationed 24/7 outside the home of every household in the U.S., in call waiting for an emergency
Using only how many people sign up as the definition of success is simply not the story. The story is - ask anyone paying insurance today - what has happened to their premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. 100% of them, other than those who get it free, will tell you they have all skyrocketed. Hence, the vast majority of americans have had to trade into cheaper plans, with less access to quality. But at least they are 'insured', right?
Using only how many people sign up as the definition of success is simply not the story. The story is - ask anyone paying insurance today - what has happened to their premiums, deductibles, and co-pays. 100% of them, other than those who get it free, will tell you they have all skyrocketed. Hence, the vast majority of americans have had to trade into cheaper plans, with less access to quality. But at least they are 'insured', right?
1
spencer maybe you should be directing your comments to the the industry that is making a bundle out of the policy structure. still 16 million newly covered with health insurance is not to be sneezed at. now that the secret is out we can call the program by its correct name "romney care". it certainly was a puzzle why the demo did not flog that name during the last presidential election - well maybe they just didn't need to after all.
2
Well, there goes your "100%" narrative. I don't get it for free, and my coverage for a family of four is WAY down from what it was in the past. I know many people in the same position.
Dr. Krugman is correct in his observation that Republicans view coverage of the uninsured as a bug, not a feature. There is a philosophical divide between the parties on health insurance. Democrats want to shield everyone from the horror of catastrophic health failures. Republicans view uninsured health problems as personal responsibility issues; they view national health insurance as insulating individuals from responsibility -- what economists call "moral hazard." But moral hazard is inherent in health insurance. The only policy fully consistent with the Republicans' philosophical stance would be to prohibit health insurance altogether.
14
Without health insurance, some sick people just let themselves get more and more ill. Often this goes on until the ambulance must be called. The sick, uninsured person is then rushed to the ER. Care is provided, at the most expensive rates possible. The uninsured person goes home and starts receiving huge medical bills they cannot possibly pay. Their credit record is ruined, thereby destroying housing and job opportunities. The hospital eventually deducts those unpaid bills from taxes or submits them some other way to governments for reimbursement. The taxpayers get stuck with the tab. The whole process gets repeated the next time the uninsured person gets so sick that an ER visit is required. This is the GOP health insurance plan.
27
Universal style single payer, medicare-for-all is the real solution; it works everywhere on plant Earth. Obama care was a decent start but no end all solution, and I believe Obama himself knows that. Get the insurance industry out of health care, out of my doctor's office, continue to clean up Medicare/ Medicaid fraud, and crack down on big pharmacy price gouging. Elect Democrats to accomplish these goals, with Repubs you'll emergency room bankrupting care for all but the rich.
38
universal single payer works in countries where everyone pays into the system, and the U.S. is still available for people to fly to get life saving surgeries which otherwise have long waiting lines in their home countries
The big deal about health care is that we pay too much for it. It is all subsidized or insurance averaged, so most of us don't get what we pay for. Insured people get to get more advanced and expensive treatments, even as costs go up and relative benefit goes down. Uninsured, get more or less the same thing but at a higher cost. For instance, a colonoscopy may cost twice as much out of pocket than what Insurance pays, because of the deals Insurance Co's make, with preferred providers. Obamacare is only the first step. What other advanced nations are doing is regulating Big Medicine (the Medical Industrial Complex) as a utility. Those who think government is the big intruder that make choices for you, don't understand the current medical industry.
15
The Affordable Care Act is at best a half measure, made so by the corporations that currently run healthcare. President Obama, if he had not been beholden (through campaign donations) to the likes of BigPharma, etc., could have championed what we really need, Medicare for All.
Bernie Sanders is not so beholden and, if elected, can finally move the U.S. into what it desperately needs to have, healthcare for all, such as every other Westernized country has.
Bernie Sanders is not so beholden and, if elected, can finally move the U.S. into what it desperately needs to have, healthcare for all, such as every other Westernized country has.
14
Yes Bernie will try. But it still comes down to the congresses. If they are not onboard then it will continue to be fight. We need to get Dems in the congress!!
Why is it this seems to much to expect?
A big share of the job growth was in health care, but that's a maintenance type thing and doesn't help exports. Manufacturing is the worst it's been in history. Wages are completely stagnant. How could the deficit not fall after the huge bailouts? It's still terrible and we are on a course for a major calamity when zero interest rates start rising and we have to finance the debt with much more money. Compare the cost of health care to the three years before Obamacare went into effect and you get a completely different picture of ever rising rates that are now kicking in and moving much faster. And most people can't afford the deductibles and end up with no insurance just like always except when they have catastrophic illness, so many are spending more for less if they don't get subsidies, and the ones that do get subsidies can't afford to use it.
1
Lots of claims but no substantiation.
6
Actually government--one payer--health care is a huge relief for business--big and small. Private insurance health care was/is a huge expense and headache for businesses and employees alike, as well as limiting freedom of choice of doctors, and doctors' freedom of choice of treatment. (In the land of the "free".)
It's not free. But--in keeping with the rationale of insurance--the costs are paid by a big pool, so individual costs won't kill anyone. Cancer doesn't care if you are rich or poor; epidemics and pandemics aren't stopped by gated communities.
Both government and insurance companies (which are actually like governments, except unaccountable to the electorate) try to oversee costs. Accountability makes a huge difference--insurance companies oversee costs and services to maximize profits; governments oversee costs to benefit patient/voters.
A healthy population is obviously a public good--just like an educated and peace loving one. No (sick) man is an island.
It's not free. But--in keeping with the rationale of insurance--the costs are paid by a big pool, so individual costs won't kill anyone. Cancer doesn't care if you are rich or poor; epidemics and pandemics aren't stopped by gated communities.
Both government and insurance companies (which are actually like governments, except unaccountable to the electorate) try to oversee costs. Accountability makes a huge difference--insurance companies oversee costs and services to maximize profits; governments oversee costs to benefit patient/voters.
A healthy population is obviously a public good--just like an educated and peace loving one. No (sick) man is an island.
4
Actually, Romney didn't get all that much done when he was governor of Massachusetts a decade ago (he was mostly on the road running for president). There's a provision of Massachusetts law called Chapter 90, which funds highway repairs, especially bridge replacements, and the like. Mitt starved Chapter 90 so that he could cut taxes, and we have been paying the price ever since he left. We're way behind on bridge repair now, even 10 years later. in my little town of 700 alone, there are three highway bridges with special weight restrictions and at least one more that is closed altogether.
Romney was a halfway decent governor here, for a Republican, but his baser instincts were held in check by a state legislature that is 80% or more Democratic. Without a liberal legislature he never could have put the health-insurance program in place, and the term Romneycare is something of a misnomer.
Romney was a halfway decent governor here, for a Republican, but his baser instincts were held in check by a state legislature that is 80% or more Democratic. Without a liberal legislature he never could have put the health-insurance program in place, and the term Romneycare is something of a misnomer.
10
You and I both have highlighted the negatives of policies that have created media disinformation. The media story is significant because it is doing harm to our society & is preventing the US from realizing its economic potential. Bombarding the American public with unbalanced, unfair reporting & lies disguised as news is not helping the economy or the GOP.
Your column, blog, and reader commentary is the best public discussion of policy that I know of. I like to read your analysis and that of your reader commentators but feel that my contribution is too invite the attention of your readership to solutions. Hence, my forays into thoughts about how we can make the world a better place in my expertise in energy, transport, & environment, mainly by policies that support & redirect investment into greater efficiency in electricity generation like Maglev launched solar generators. It is reliable & inexpensive & would make it possible to synthesize competitively priced liquid fuel from carbon dioxide in air & hydrogen in water; augmenting the Interstate Highway System with a new 300 mph 2nd Gen Superconducting Maglev transport system for carrying trucks and passengers. This same system can be adapted to existing light rail commuter railroads & will save taxpayers money. This new industry would create good paying jobs. Clearly, a Maglev Test Program should be included in this year's surface transport authorization so that the US can compete with foreign government offerings.
Your column, blog, and reader commentary is the best public discussion of policy that I know of. I like to read your analysis and that of your reader commentators but feel that my contribution is too invite the attention of your readership to solutions. Hence, my forays into thoughts about how we can make the world a better place in my expertise in energy, transport, & environment, mainly by policies that support & redirect investment into greater efficiency in electricity generation like Maglev launched solar generators. It is reliable & inexpensive & would make it possible to synthesize competitively priced liquid fuel from carbon dioxide in air & hydrogen in water; augmenting the Interstate Highway System with a new 300 mph 2nd Gen Superconducting Maglev transport system for carrying trucks and passengers. This same system can be adapted to existing light rail commuter railroads & will save taxpayers money. This new industry would create good paying jobs. Clearly, a Maglev Test Program should be included in this year's surface transport authorization so that the US can compete with foreign government offerings.
6
I'm waiting for a realignment or paradigm change in the balance of power in Washington. I know that it's usually darkest before the dawn, but I've never seen it so dark before. Nowadays the political valkyries seem has been favoring the antigovernment hard right in the battle for power and influence. But the tide may soon turn as flawed ideas are ultimately delegitimized by a fed up public.
8
The single, most notable development in the Republican worldview over the past 35 years is its gradual divorce from reality. Even some rational Republicans have commented on the phenomenon: Ben Bernanke and David Frum, for example. (http://nymag.com/news/politics/conservatives-david-frum-2011-11/). Or Bobby Jindal, warning his colleagues back in 2013 that their trajectory put them on the path to becoming the "stupid party." The trajectory has not changed since then, except, maybe, that it's picked up speed.
Interestingly, the trial separation from reality which preceded the divorce, occurred about the same time Jerry Falwell formed the Moral Majority and started getting involved in Republican politics. Increasingly, Republican candidates were forced to choose one or the other: Fundamentalist Christianity or Reality. Naturally, they chose the one that would get them elected the fastest.
Interestingly, the trial separation from reality which preceded the divorce, occurred about the same time Jerry Falwell formed the Moral Majority and started getting involved in Republican politics. Increasingly, Republican candidates were forced to choose one or the other: Fundamentalist Christianity or Reality. Naturally, they chose the one that would get them elected the fastest.
18
To the end of my days, I will never understand why Republicans are so keen to deprive their own constituents of healthcare. Is it just contempt for that uppity half-breed who had the temerity to win two terms by defeating honorable white men? If so, it is contemptible, and they deserve to lose their seats in Congress.
21
If Mitt Romney had stood up for his beliefs he may have become President. Instead, he lied to get the nomination and then kept on lying. Now, he is a tragic figure. I Shakespeare were to come back, he would write a play about him.
16
Clearly there are some people who have been hurt: the people who live in GOP states that refused the Medicaid expansion. The people who earn too little to be eligible for Federal subsidies, and are still required to pay for insurance (or pay a $695 fine) have clearly been hurt. However, it is not Obamacare that hurt them, but a deliberate, cruel, and gratuitous policy of Republican obstruction.
There's a certain kind of callousness - one can only call it evil - which sets policies that hurt one's most vulnerable citizens by preventing someone else from helping them, in the hopes that their pain will cause political trouble for one's opponents.
There's a certain kind of callousness - one can only call it evil - which sets policies that hurt one's most vulnerable citizens by preventing someone else from helping them, in the hopes that their pain will cause political trouble for one's opponents.
37
The real problem with Obamacare is that it didn't go far enough and part of the reason for that is that in order to get it passed Obama had to make deals with the insurance and drug companies. Yes, more people have insurance, but they also have high deductibles. So they have protection against catastrophic illnesses, but not access to chronic and preventive therapies. That's also why spending is going down, because by shifting the cost to patients, they're choosing to forgo treatments and meds that from their perspective they can't afford. When it's a choice of paying your rent or paying for a medicaiton that's going to prevent a stroke or heart failure 20 years from now, most people opt to address the immediate short term need over the long term one.
10
But wait -- are you saying that before these people were insured, they were availing themselves of treatments and meds that now, with insurance, they cannot afford? Makes very little sense. I would've said they couldn't afford them before they were insured, either.
For me it is not a choice of doctor or rent-- I am pretty fine economically. But the high deductibles are keeping me from going to the doctor for an injury that should at least be looked at. I just can't stomach spending $500 or more to be looked at. Medicare for all!
1
Dr. Krugman's column points out once again that GOP ideology will stand in the way of any progress, even if it benefits their constituents and voters. The sad point, that is seldom mentioned, is that the majority of the supporters of this ideology continue to vote for candidates who make Americans suffer as a country and as individuals. It is almost like a religion whose mandate is self-flagellation. Sad, really dad.
18
Carson has on rare occasions been asked pointed questions about his various bizarre statements and vague policy positions, like he was on Marketplace on NPR. He simply answers a different question in his head or beats around the bush or changes the topic or otherwise does answer the actual question. Repeated tries including explaining the actual issue in question did not result in anything else.
Yes, far more is actually needed. Imagine him being repeatedly interviewed by BBC reporters who are a little less polite and are actually willing bear down on their interviewees and seriously try to get answers.
Yes, far more is actually needed. Imagine him being repeatedly interviewed by BBC reporters who are a little less polite and are actually willing bear down on their interviewees and seriously try to get answers.
5
Well, it looks as though the republican stance of negating the obvious, that the ACA has become a lifesaver for millions of folks who, for the first time, can afford health insurance. And this stupidity, otherwise called "willful ignorance" of the facts, so to spite Obama, has been embraced by,of all people, Mitt Romney, in spite of Obamacare's obvious resemblance to Romneycare. All this, to satisfy a rabid extreme right, intent not to govern (while living on governmental dole) but to block any sensible law intent to help the very people that elected them. That Mitt has shot himself in its foot is deplorable, as is Marco Rubio's cowardice in retracting his initial support for immigration reform, just to satisfy the least representative, though most loud, Tea Party (and, lest we forget, endorsed by the rest of the G.O.P. by their complicit silence). Dysfunctional doesn't even start to explain the irrational, immature and hateful behavior of those supposed to be well versed in civics, responsibility and at least a whiff of empathy towards those willing to trust their lives and future on them. And we haven't even mentioned other "tedcruzes" that are co-participants in this farcical mayhem.
11
Glad that Dr. Krugman lays out the success of Obamacare, one of the great, under-reported "good news" stories of recent times. Sad, though, that Democrats were so slow to get the memo and publicize their own success. Sad, too, that the many Democratic candidates that the Clintons so actively campaigned for in 2014 (to keep crazy uncle Obama in the closet) ran from Obamacare like the plague (and usually lost). If the plan had had more defenders as well as detractors, the American public today might have a whole different vision of it. As for the drawbacks, which Dr. Krugman points out, some are bureaucratic, some (like the resistance to Medicare) are political, but most have to do with the cost of health care. Even if we do a better job of reining in profiteering or controlling waste (needless or ineffective tests and treatments), the bottom line is that we all have to recognize that good health costs money, those costs must be shared broadly (with everyone taking some responsibility), and those factors (in the food industry, in the environment, etc.) that drive up health costs by fostering ill health need to be addressed aggressively without concern for the profits that are sickening (literally) the rest of us.
9
Despite its better-than-nothing "success" with ACA, our healthcare system is loaded with cruelties. The Romneycare plan that ACA was based on came out of a right-leaning think tank. But because That Man, who is one of Those People, used it as the basis for Obamacare, thinking logically that the right would therefore sort of accept it, it is now the worst thing to happen since slavery.
This is about Republican scorched-earth politics. A former colleague--you might call her an old-fashioned, cloth-coat Republican--told me a story of how a 41 Bush program that Clinton continued was abruptly halted when 43 came into office because there would be no Clinton programs in 43's tenure--including the budget surplus. So a modest and successful program--can't for the life of me remember what it was, except that it had to do with helping minorities--went away.
I changed jobs and changed insurance. As of September 1, all of my accumulated out-of-pocket expenses reset to $0. And a medication I have been using for nearly a decade has been declared off-limits. The alternate med has no generic. The old one does, except that the generic is more expensive than the new, brand-name med.
Compared to a single-payer system, the ACA is job-growth-inhibiting. Imagine the small businesses that would be created if prospective employers didn't have to worry about the morass of healthcare for prospective employees.
Compared to what could be, ACA is sad. But it's the best we're going to get.
This is about Republican scorched-earth politics. A former colleague--you might call her an old-fashioned, cloth-coat Republican--told me a story of how a 41 Bush program that Clinton continued was abruptly halted when 43 came into office because there would be no Clinton programs in 43's tenure--including the budget surplus. So a modest and successful program--can't for the life of me remember what it was, except that it had to do with helping minorities--went away.
I changed jobs and changed insurance. As of September 1, all of my accumulated out-of-pocket expenses reset to $0. And a medication I have been using for nearly a decade has been declared off-limits. The alternate med has no generic. The old one does, except that the generic is more expensive than the new, brand-name med.
Compared to a single-payer system, the ACA is job-growth-inhibiting. Imagine the small businesses that would be created if prospective employers didn't have to worry about the morass of healthcare for prospective employees.
Compared to what could be, ACA is sad. But it's the best we're going to get.
14
The trope about health insurance (or, raising the minimum wage) being job-killers has never made any sense to me. If you run a business and you need someone to do some work that will help you make money, there is going to be a cost. If it is worthwhile for your business to have someone do that work in some sense it doesn't matter what that costs as long as the result, making more money, is there. Or, perhaps, even achieving the result of not making more money but of preserving your business (or yourself) from collapse.
Getting rid of employees because they may complicate your business life with required health insurance, like required withholdings or anything else, sounds to me like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Perhaps an economist could show me the error of my ways.
Or is this really all about the benefits of slavery (for the massas)?
Getting rid of employees because they may complicate your business life with required health insurance, like required withholdings or anything else, sounds to me like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Perhaps an economist could show me the error of my ways.
Or is this really all about the benefits of slavery (for the massas)?
1
If the ACA is such a success, why does a majority of Americans (not crazy Republican politicians) continue have an unfavorable view of it ?
The September 2015 KFF Healthcare tracking poll shows that 41% see it favorable but 45% see it unfavorable. It has been at about these values over the last 5 years, contrary to the claim that the ACA would become more popular as the public gets to know it better.
The American public sees the ACA as what it is, a well meaning, but botched reform, that pandered too much to special interests to get it passed.
The September 2015 KFF Healthcare tracking poll shows that 41% see it favorable but 45% see it unfavorable. It has been at about these values over the last 5 years, contrary to the claim that the ACA would become more popular as the public gets to know it better.
The American public sees the ACA as what it is, a well meaning, but botched reform, that pandered too much to special interests to get it passed.
5
I would love to see a breakdown of the data. IE- how many people answering the question about Obamacare have ever used it or have had close loved ones using it? Also a breakdown by political affiliation. A large portion of the people against it are parroting Fox News and will never be in a position to use this resource because they are on Medicare.
5
The polls have discovered that when questions are asked about individual components of Obamacare, like coverage for pre existing conditions and for children to the age of 26, the response is very favorable.
3
perhaps because of the relentless Republican/Fox/Limbaugh crusade against it. Look at its popular name; who knows what the actual legislation is called?
You're right about "The American public sees the ACA as what it is, a well meaning, but botched reform, that pandered too much to special interests to get it passed," but this too was because of the administration's attempt to be bipartisan.
You're right about "The American public sees the ACA as what it is, a well meaning, but botched reform, that pandered too much to special interests to get it passed," but this too was because of the administration's attempt to be bipartisan.
The fact that Obamacare allows states to "op out" and that this provision of the law has been affirmed by the Supreme Court points to the potential of a new reality in America: if the so called Red States don't want to participate in federal programs, if they don't want to improve the lives of their citizens, even with money from the rest of us, shouldn't we let them go their own way on many other programs? Why should we pump money into these states to help their citizens survive on Walmart wages? Why should we worry so much about trying to make life better in Mississippi or Alabama if those states don't want, and utterly resent, the national government's attempts to help them?
As it stands now, one of the most massive welfare programs in America is supports for people who are working but don't make enough money to support themselves. This is welfare for corporations, subsidies that taxpayers make to Walmart and other businesses for underpaying their employees. Why do we do this? Why do people focus their concerns, and their rage, on minorities instead of on the corporations using food stamps and other programs to subsidize the wages of their employees?
Why fight so hard to make the lives of people in Republican states better if their elected leaders don't want the assistance? A day of reckoning could be coming in which the Democrats say, "No more."
As it stands now, one of the most massive welfare programs in America is supports for people who are working but don't make enough money to support themselves. This is welfare for corporations, subsidies that taxpayers make to Walmart and other businesses for underpaying their employees. Why do we do this? Why do people focus their concerns, and their rage, on minorities instead of on the corporations using food stamps and other programs to subsidize the wages of their employees?
Why fight so hard to make the lives of people in Republican states better if their elected leaders don't want the assistance? A day of reckoning could be coming in which the Democrats say, "No more."
22
I agree and I believe Lincoln made a mistake not letting them secede. They don't believe in science, education or anything else that helps people. They are a drag on our nation. Next time they yell 'let us secede' I say yes, let them go. They are leeches on the rest of the nation.
18
Because people will migrate to more favorable states - e.g. California will get the economic migrants from Kansas who will refuse to adopt to the California culture. Emigration would still leave Kansas with two senators, i.e. Unfair representation.
Presumably you believe that slavery would have disappeared without Federal intervention. Sad to say, it's America's responsibility to provide federal services even to the benighted.
Perhaps Krugman writes about Mitt Romney today because there is nothing - and I mean nothing - sane that can be written about any occupants of the 2016 Republican Clown Car.
Ah, Mittens, we miss ya'
Ah, Mittens, we miss ya'
9
The reason the GOP hates Obama and ObamaCare is becuse both are doing a great job for all Americans, not just the Greedy One Percent.
19
Jon Stewart says it best when he says that both Republicans and Democrats are winning. Basically, the people all want "free stuff", or at least stuff that they specifically do not have to pay for themselves. Remember, GWB and the Republicans created a heavily subsidized drug plan for seniors (Medicare Part D), and did not change tax rates to help pay for it. So, they expanded the welfare state, but with no new taxes allowing both Republicans and Democrats to win. But with the ACA, premiums and deductibles are quite expensive, and taxes have also gone up, because ACA is paid for, meaning "not free". Republicans don't hate "free stuff", and they do hate paying for things, and this is why they don't like the ACA.
11
and yet it saves the govt money. how does that work.
republicans dont mind spending money on people who refuse to work- see congress. they mind spending money on anyone but the fabulously wealthy
republicans dont mind spending money on people who refuse to work- see congress. they mind spending money on anyone but the fabulously wealthy
1
Awhile ago, I was asked to pick the perfect neologism(ie make up a new word) for the concept of the Republican partry's growing lack of enthusaism for Mitt Romney as a political candidate. I came up with what I thought was the perfect word: Disilliusionmitt.
I now realize that this may apply to Governor Romney as well. He is having increasing disillusionmitt with his time in the Republican party and I would bet, being a Repub in general, as any thinking person would
I now realize that this may apply to Governor Romney as well. He is having increasing disillusionmitt with his time in the Republican party and I would bet, being a Repub in general, as any thinking person would
5
"It’s not about how much it costs in taxpayer funds or economic impact: the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering."
Probably the most truthful & succinct statement on Republican thought yet made.
Probably the most truthful & succinct statement on Republican thought yet made.
23
"the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering." This is a fact that should be stressed more. If you listen to such as Rush Limbaugh or Laura Ingraham for a few minutes, you can not escape hearing their tone of glee when attacking anything or anyone that seeks to alleviate the unfairly caused suffering of those near the bottom (or in the middle going down) of our stratified society. Is it it not obvious that a main motivator of the radical right is an outright sadistic desire to cause or exacerbate pain, particularly among those least able to protect themselves?
Their God is not the compassionate Jesus, or even the just but often violent Yahweh --- it resembles nothing so much as Moloch (assisted by Mammon) demanding sacrifices and never satisfied.
Their God is not the compassionate Jesus, or even the just but often violent Yahweh --- it resembles nothing so much as Moloch (assisted by Mammon) demanding sacrifices and never satisfied.
13
Lesson 1 for Mitt Romney, dont read the NYT for advice.
1
Romney's comments are previews of things to come. Once Obamacare is incontrovertibly proven to be a success, the GOP will label it Romneycare and pledge to protect it from cuts by the Democrats.
4
Paul, read today's NY Times, there are two articles on how Obamacare is not helping. By our President's own criteria his program is an unmitigated failure. We cannot keep our plans or our Doctors, the price has risen, not dropped, by more than $2500, and Obamacare has added not one but an incalculable number of "dimes" to the deficit.
1
Perhaps at top of the Republican Party they're thinking about running Mitt again.
As much as I was horrified by his 47 percent remark, he looks remarkably sane compared to the other GOP candidates.
As much as I was horrified by his 47 percent remark, he looks remarkably sane compared to the other GOP candidates.
6
Anyone who even glancingly paid attention to Romney as governor, who ever saw the video of him attacking the MA 'free riders' who would not be able to evade paying for health insurance due to the Romneycare/Heritage Foundation individual mandate knows that the ONLY reason Mitt ever cared about universal health insurance was as a presidential campaign issue: HE had done what no other governor had done and HE could take it nationwide.
Well, times sure changed when Democrats and a half-black president adopted that Republican plan and implemented it.
Ain't irony hilarious?
But, Mitt's current backtracking speaks to the REAL problem in the Republican Party. It has no true politician leaders, only pandering politicians who parrot what the 'leaders' outside the party - Limbaugh, the Roger Ailes talking heads at Fox, the bloggers, etc. - keep the GOP base stirred up about.
So, Mitt is just like GHW Bush, Bob Dole and many, many more Real Republicans who keep their mouths shut and simply don't have the guts to stand up to the quietly hostile Libertarian/Koch/Club for Growth takeover of the once GOP.
When your party's gone, boys, you will have killed it, the party of Lincoln, with your cowardice. You really should be ashamed to have allowed a bunch of authoritarians, fascists to do that.
Well, times sure changed when Democrats and a half-black president adopted that Republican plan and implemented it.
Ain't irony hilarious?
But, Mitt's current backtracking speaks to the REAL problem in the Republican Party. It has no true politician leaders, only pandering politicians who parrot what the 'leaders' outside the party - Limbaugh, the Roger Ailes talking heads at Fox, the bloggers, etc. - keep the GOP base stirred up about.
So, Mitt is just like GHW Bush, Bob Dole and many, many more Real Republicans who keep their mouths shut and simply don't have the guts to stand up to the quietly hostile Libertarian/Koch/Club for Growth takeover of the once GOP.
When your party's gone, boys, you will have killed it, the party of Lincoln, with your cowardice. You really should be ashamed to have allowed a bunch of authoritarians, fascists to do that.
13
except dems don't vote and dems don't fight the gop is safe
Mitt "severely conservative" Romney could have boasted more of his own signature achievement as Governor - guaranteed coverage accomplished during his brief tenure in MA - but he instead soft-pedaled it, lest he cross his party on their talking points about "socialized medicine." Never mind that this was originally a conservative goal! That was before the GOP decided that good could come only from the states, not from Washington. So Romney failed to launch himself into Washington with a party that would not have gotten behind his own established leadership! Since Romney could not have stood up for himself, or for anything, he deserved to lose.
83
"Not surprisingly, then, Mr. Romney quickly tried to walk his comments back..."
Oh, no! Mitt! What happened to "No Apologies?"
Oh, no! Mitt! What happened to "No Apologies?"
4
The Republican Party is an excellent example of the old cliche: "Penny-wise and pound-foolish." Universal health care, with a mandate, has been a Republican idea, going back to President Richard Nixon in 1972, when he sent a letter to Congress recommending it. It was one of the top goals in Bob Dole's run for the Presidency. Newt Gingrich suggested it in his 2008 book, and Mitt Romney wrote an Op-Ed in USA Today, recommending that President Obama use his Mass. Health Care Plan as the template for a copy to be established nationwide.
But, when President Obama took the need for such a plan to heart, the GOP immediately did an about-face on health care. Refusing Extended Medicaid, not allowing Insurance Commissioners to negotiate with insurance companies for better prices, libelous TV ads and just bad-mouthing "Obamacare", using all of those nasty lies that Professor Paul cited.
And now, five and a half years after ACA was signed into law, several GOP Presidential candidates have come-up with counter-proposals. But these would do nothing more than: privatize the insurance plans, giving control back to the insurance companies; place restrictions back on "prior-existing conditions"; and otherwise take the country back to shoddy, incomplete, useless health insurance.
Once again, the GOP prefers to allow the corporate interests, ideology and egos trump fairness, health care for the needy and common sense.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
But, when President Obama took the need for such a plan to heart, the GOP immediately did an about-face on health care. Refusing Extended Medicaid, not allowing Insurance Commissioners to negotiate with insurance companies for better prices, libelous TV ads and just bad-mouthing "Obamacare", using all of those nasty lies that Professor Paul cited.
And now, five and a half years after ACA was signed into law, several GOP Presidential candidates have come-up with counter-proposals. But these would do nothing more than: privatize the insurance plans, giving control back to the insurance companies; place restrictions back on "prior-existing conditions"; and otherwise take the country back to shoddy, incomplete, useless health insurance.
Once again, the GOP prefers to allow the corporate interests, ideology and egos trump fairness, health care for the needy and common sense.
http://thetruthoncommonsense.com
13
One of the simplest aspects of Obamacare has to sound good to just about anybody, I think. That is: Under the old system people who needed healthcare the most, people with pre-existing conditions, had no access to affordable care unless they were part of a large group. In a nutshell: We can afford what is necessary when we contribute collectively. The same thing apples to roads, firehouses, the military. It seems like a simple equation to me. Sometimes it seems like we have controversy for the sake of controversy. Not one of these Republicans would be willing to pave their own road before they drove downtown. We've done if for them. All they have to do is say thank you.
13
The plutocrats are in control of the GOP. Social issues are just pandering to the undereducated base. Plutocrats want a weak federal government so they can privatize everything through the states, decrease their taxes, plunder their customers and make money destroying the environment.
Many states are too weak and poor to stand up to the plutocrats and so the plutocrats want to drown the federal government in that proverbial bathtub.
Many states are too weak and poor to stand up to the plutocrats and so the plutocrats want to drown the federal government in that proverbial bathtub.
3
What? Professor, are you proposing Mitt Romney for Democrats in 2016?? :)
Mr. Romney will go down in history as a man who pandered to every interest he thought would get him elected, and discovered that the electorate ... as dumb as he imagined it to be, had a longer memory than he thought.
That immortal line from "Huckleberry Finn" applies: one of the grifters opines "H'ain't the fools in town on our side? Ain't that a big enough majority in any town?"
In the novel the two were tarred and feathered by the angry public coming down the river after them. In real life politicians and banksters get to keep their swag and try to spin their failures.
That immortal line from "Huckleberry Finn" applies: one of the grifters opines "H'ain't the fools in town on our side? Ain't that a big enough majority in any town?"
In the novel the two were tarred and feathered by the angry public coming down the river after them. In real life politicians and banksters get to keep their swag and try to spin their failures.
4
Mitt Romney was the most efficient, and professional executive that Massachusetts had occupy the Govenor's office. Not only was he efficient and a very hard worker - but - he expected the same from state employees. The statistic of 47% of Americans NOT paying taxes is very true. Although, people scoff at the reality of it - the figure is no joke, neither is it false.
1
It is false. You are speaking of federal income taxes which they don't make enough money to pay but they pay plenty of other taxes and frequently pay a larger percentage of their income in taxes than the others.
8
All Americans pay taxes of one kind or another. If you are referring to income taxes, that 47% includes a lot of millionaires, highly profitable corporations, small businesses that don't report all their income as well as people with incomes below a living wage.
6
I think those 47% ought to have their wages increased to the point that they do owe federal income tax. Problem solved.
3
I feel bad for Mitt. I live in Boston and know his time as governor. Never have I seen someone who fit the definition of making a faustian bargain more than him. He was so desperate to be president that half way through his term he went out of his way to adopt extreme right wing views like his position on abortion. Maybe he felt that having Romneycare and right wing credentials would be a combo that could propel him to the Whitehouse--something for everyone! His downfall was that he had and has no center, we still don't know what he stands for. Certainly not the dog's breakfast of ideas he's saddled himself with.
5
Romney was so proud of Romneycare that he insisted the symbol of medicine, the caduceus, be pictured in his official portrait as governor. In the first edition of his biography, “No Apology,” he expressed hope that Romneycare would be a model for national healthcare. This hope was deleted from the second edition, published during his presidential campaign. What a sad man, having to disown his greatest achievement!
331
"Sometimes I find myself feeling sorry for Mitt Romney." A liberal has the capacity to feel sorry somebody like Romney, if only briefly, while somebody like Romney has the capacity to only feel sorry for himself or his own. That's a pretty good start in understanding the two parties.
7
You have to wonder why a new third party hasn't formed--a moderate Republican Party proud of Rockefeller, and even of Barry Goldwater. They weren't haters--they represented different positions within a sane party.
7
The dreaded health care mandate was first proposed by "conservatives" during the Nixon admin in response to Kennedy's proposal for universal health insurance. In 2008 the health care mandate was opposed by Obama & supported by "mainstream" Republicans, & HRC. Only after taking office in 2009 did Obama support the health care mandate. Senators Grassley, McCain & other "mainstream" Republicans woke up to the horrors of the health care mandate. Obama derangement syndrome began to blossom...now being displaced by HRC derangement syndrome which has been with us for over 20 years.
6
Overutilization, unnecessary tests and treatments, is a huge problem costing us about $800 Billion a year. AND these tests and treatments are ordered by physicians. See the recent series "Paying until it hurts" for more data.
Overhead of private insurance wastes over $200 Billion each year (The ACA will reduce this a bit).
Compliance costs (filling out forms on paper or online) of physicians and hospitals due to zillions of different private insurance plans waste $200 - $400 Billion a year. I have no estimate for compliance costs for patients.
Drug companies spend about 11% of their budget on R & D, 19% on profit and 34% on marketing. (google Alan Sager). This accounts for another $100 Billion.
The bottom line is:
All other industrialized countries have some form of universal government run health care, mostly single payor. They get better care as measured by all 16 of the bottom line public health statistics, and they do it at 40% of the cost per person. If our system were as efficient, we would save over $1.5 TRILLION each year.
www.pnhp.org & www.oecd.org, especially
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf
Overhead of private insurance wastes over $200 Billion each year (The ACA will reduce this a bit).
Compliance costs (filling out forms on paper or online) of physicians and hospitals due to zillions of different private insurance plans waste $200 - $400 Billion a year. I have no estimate for compliance costs for patients.
Drug companies spend about 11% of their budget on R & D, 19% on profit and 34% on marketing. (google Alan Sager). This accounts for another $100 Billion.
The bottom line is:
All other industrialized countries have some form of universal government run health care, mostly single payor. They get better care as measured by all 16 of the bottom line public health statistics, and they do it at 40% of the cost per person. If our system were as efficient, we would save over $1.5 TRILLION each year.
www.pnhp.org & www.oecd.org, especially
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf
6
My, my...what a prolix bunch of wordy commentators today. Me thinks that we need new strategies to get people to vote, to actually cast a ballot yea or nay. I can think of some interesting carrot and stick ideas. Potted palms and plush carpets in the front, whips and chains in the back?
I guess Romney has recuperated from his 2012 bout of being "severely conservative."
"... a pretty rarefied, upper-middle-class-and-above milieu"?
For a guy who has made a punditry career out of half truths and misleading statistics, this one takes the cake.
Let me translate for those of you without a dissemble decipherer on hand.
"I am a one percenter"
Paul, please do tell me who recommends wine to you and where you get your ascot cleaned.
For a guy who has made a punditry career out of half truths and misleading statistics, this one takes the cake.
Let me translate for those of you without a dissemble decipherer on hand.
"I am a one percenter"
Paul, please do tell me who recommends wine to you and where you get your ascot cleaned.
4
A one per center who cares about what happens to the 99% enrages you? Would you rather he spent his time and energy advocating for taking even more from the poor and giving it tot he rich?
2
hate those who have made something of themselves by their own work? A pundit? this is a PHD recognized world wide for his contributions.
no wonder you hate, he has an education, and education is baaaad
no wonder you hate, he has an education, and education is baaaad
1
I feel as sorry for Mitt as I do for Jeb(!) being put into the position of either defending the Iraq war or throwing his brother under the bus; that is to say, "Not at all."
2
Can someone explain to this dumb Brit why some people oppose Obamacare ? Widening access to health insurance seems like a no brainer.
9
Free Mitt Romney? Good luck finding takers on that offer.
40
Iowa "caucus goers" yearn for those "good old days" of Jim Crow and separate, but "equal." The great thing is that the rest of the country doesn't care what Iowa "caucus goers" think. Mitt Romney? Meh. Not even a footnote in history.
2
Once again, the marketing and PR aspect of Affirdable Care Act is lagging behind. Why is it that people have not realized how much good it has done in the richest country in the world where people did not have access to basic health care? I had not heard Trump talk but happened to watch a short segment of his rally speech at Jacksonville, Florida, where first he made a big deal about how wealthy he is and how rlthr other candidates are being managed by super PACs....and then how Obamacare was such a headache! How would he know? Being rich he doesn't need Obamacare for himself but he is probably hurting as an employer because he has to provide it to his employee, huh?
3
corporate news, once in the hands of many, with many opinions, is now (and since reagan) owned by 6-7 GOP contributing outfits.
there is nothing more dangerous than a free press and a public with the time to pay attention.
which is hard to do when you have to keep food on your family
there is nothing more dangerous than a free press and a public with the time to pay attention.
which is hard to do when you have to keep food on your family
Spot on Dr.K. Nothing galls a Republican than Democrats doing something to help ordinary people. Ben Carter saying that Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery and 81% of Iowa Republicans finding that such a statements makes Carter more attractive as a candidate tells us as much about the Iowa Republicans as it does about Carter, which is that the combination of ignorance, paranoia and bigotry which we call conservatism is a mental disease and it is contagious and immune to the best treatments for political maladies, truth, accurate information, reason and patriotism.
When we look at polls of Republicans, we are only measuring the infected and in the case of Iowa Republicans, those who are too far gone. But there are Democrats in Iowa and elsewhere who are sick of Republican know nothingism and are armed with truth, accurate information, reason and patriotism and they are coming out to vote. The sane are leaving the Republican ship which is sinking fast and the wise and reasonable are jumping ship. If we see Mitt in the water he deserves rescue and the opportunity for atonement.
When we look at polls of Republicans, we are only measuring the infected and in the case of Iowa Republicans, those who are too far gone. But there are Democrats in Iowa and elsewhere who are sick of Republican know nothingism and are armed with truth, accurate information, reason and patriotism and they are coming out to vote. The sane are leaving the Republican ship which is sinking fast and the wise and reasonable are jumping ship. If we see Mitt in the water he deserves rescue and the opportunity for atonement.
3
"... the combination of ignorance, paranoia and bigotry which we call conservatism is a mental disease..." - very well stated
After the hearing debacle last week, I finally got scared. I will do anything I can to keep this army of rampaging stupids out of the White House.
The GOP of my youth is not dead, it's the undead.
The GOP of my youth is not dead, it's the undead.
2
Any policy with the word "care" in it is an anathema to the Republican party.
2
"Not surprisingly, then, Mr. Romney quickly tried to walk his comments back, claiming that Obamacare is very different from Romneycare, which it isn’t, and that it has failed."
In a nutshell, this sentence reveals why Romney wasn't and will never be president. He lacks character, conviction and guts and his fallback position is weaseling his way out of what he said and did. If a person can't defend their own position, can't defend the one worthwhile idea they had while serving in government -- then why would anyone support him when he won't support himself.
If he had an iota of character, he'd have stood up to his party when they were trashing the ACA and "owned it" and touted the fact that the plan he put in place in MA worked and was a good plan, instead he slunk away from HIS PLAN and stood by and allowed the rightwingnuts to denigrate it. He's a shallow man.
In a nutshell, this sentence reveals why Romney wasn't and will never be president. He lacks character, conviction and guts and his fallback position is weaseling his way out of what he said and did. If a person can't defend their own position, can't defend the one worthwhile idea they had while serving in government -- then why would anyone support him when he won't support himself.
If he had an iota of character, he'd have stood up to his party when they were trashing the ACA and "owned it" and touted the fact that the plan he put in place in MA worked and was a good plan, instead he slunk away from HIS PLAN and stood by and allowed the rightwingnuts to denigrate it. He's a shallow man.
260
Bush 41 got to be president doing that Sheri. So it can be done in GOP circles. In fact it has to considering all the opinions that have to be stifled or changed to suit their radical base.
I left Massachusetts before the Romney governorship, but I think that Mitt's career needs to be evaluated in the light of Massachusetts politics. A strongly blue state, Massachusetts has often chosen Republican governors as a balance. Most of those governors try to forge alliances with Democrats in order to get legislation passed. Eventually they get cut off at the knees by the national Republican party. For example, Bill Weld seemed an OK chap, but he couldn't even get an ambassadorship after he retired.
Viewed in this framework, it seems possible that Romney didn't want a change to healthcare at all. Perhaps he thought a new plan was inevitable and proposed Romneycare to head off more radical plans like single-payer.
Viewed in this framework, it seems possible that Romney didn't want a change to healthcare at all. Perhaps he thought a new plan was inevitable and proposed Romneycare to head off more radical plans like single-payer.
2
In other words, Mitt should be hanging out with the likes of Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, to put a kinder, gentler face on it, no matter how good Larry is at math.
Some of us would like to free of all of them, the endless "trahison des clercs". "Moochers", indeed.
Some of us would like to free of all of them, the endless "trahison des clercs". "Moochers", indeed.
History can be fickle and cruel, but poor choices by those who fight the flow of history for the wrong reasons make a sad end more likely.
In the recent history of the Republican Party we have seen two very different men make choices to ignore the lessons of their fathers, and ultimately they paid a heavy price.
George W. Bush felt compelled for some unknown reason to resist good examples of his father, George H. W. Bush, and it gave the son – and the American people – the slide into voodoo economics and thoughtless adventurism in Iraq.
Mitt Romney, while Governor of Massachusetts, seemed ready and able to follow the good example of his father, George W. Romney – a truly exceptional Republican whose positions on economic opportunity for all, decent housing for the poor, racial justice and avoiding unwise military adventures were intelligent and courageous.
Instead, Mitt’s thirst to sit in the Oval Office – a privilege his father lost by speaking too candidly and holding moderate and even socially liberal views – overcame his better nature. Mitt bowed to the conservative pressures of Republican presidential debates and apparently decided not to make what he considered were his father’s mistakes.
Mitt pivoted hard to the right at the very time that a moderate view might have defeated a young and inexperienced Barack Obama.
In dissing Obamacare is Mitt wasting a rare second chance?
In the recent history of the Republican Party we have seen two very different men make choices to ignore the lessons of their fathers, and ultimately they paid a heavy price.
George W. Bush felt compelled for some unknown reason to resist good examples of his father, George H. W. Bush, and it gave the son – and the American people – the slide into voodoo economics and thoughtless adventurism in Iraq.
Mitt Romney, while Governor of Massachusetts, seemed ready and able to follow the good example of his father, George W. Romney – a truly exceptional Republican whose positions on economic opportunity for all, decent housing for the poor, racial justice and avoiding unwise military adventures were intelligent and courageous.
Instead, Mitt’s thirst to sit in the Oval Office – a privilege his father lost by speaking too candidly and holding moderate and even socially liberal views – overcame his better nature. Mitt bowed to the conservative pressures of Republican presidential debates and apparently decided not to make what he considered were his father’s mistakes.
Mitt pivoted hard to the right at the very time that a moderate view might have defeated a young and inexperienced Barack Obama.
In dissing Obamacare is Mitt wasting a rare second chance?
103
"It looks as if there will be a partial rebound in 2016, but it’s still cheaper than expected"
one always new that the battle would have to continue
perhaps if mr shkreli did not charge 750 dollars for a common medicine used to treat like threatening toxoplamosis infections
and other things like that, insurance premiums wouldn't go up so much
one always new that the battle would have to continue
perhaps if mr shkreli did not charge 750 dollars for a common medicine used to treat like threatening toxoplamosis infections
and other things like that, insurance premiums wouldn't go up so much
3
Compare and contrast.
When Bush launched Medicare D, the prescription drug plan, most--although not all--Democrats voted against it. But most Democrats worked on the federal and state level to implement it effectively, even thought the roll out was a disaster and the measure was far more unpopular in polling than the ACA. Nobody sued either. Eventually, the ACA fixed the major problem with MED D, the $2,500 donut hole.
That's the difference between governance and nihilism.
When Bush launched Medicare D, the prescription drug plan, most--although not all--Democrats voted against it. But most Democrats worked on the federal and state level to implement it effectively, even thought the roll out was a disaster and the measure was far more unpopular in polling than the ACA. Nobody sued either. Eventually, the ACA fixed the major problem with MED D, the $2,500 donut hole.
That's the difference between governance and nihilism.
3
Liberal thinking used to cherish an exchange of differing opinions because it was thought provoking.
Krugman's column has degenerated into propaganda for Democrats and essentially "hate speech" against Republicans.
The NYT needs an Opinion columnist, who offers opinions that differ fromn the repetitive liberal Democrat "talking points" which has become so mind numbing.
Krugman's column has degenerated into propaganda for Democrats and essentially "hate speech" against Republicans.
The NYT needs an Opinion columnist, who offers opinions that differ fromn the repetitive liberal Democrat "talking points" which has become so mind numbing.
3
What opinions of the right do you think are thought provoking worthy?
Women should not have contraception?
The US should be a punitive theocracy?
We can decline hospital and hospice care to certain groups of people?
Blacks should have voting rights removed via lack of valid ID cards?
One out of a hundred people in prison is not enough?
We should round up and deport 11 million people, based on race?
Women should not have contraception?
The US should be a punitive theocracy?
We can decline hospital and hospice care to certain groups of people?
Blacks should have voting rights removed via lack of valid ID cards?
One out of a hundred people in prison is not enough?
We should round up and deport 11 million people, based on race?
facts about the outcome of rep economic policy and international policy are not talking points.
just like reviewing bush2's horrifically failed record is not a show of hatred.
facts just have a hurtful liberal bias
just like reviewing bush2's horrifically failed record is not a show of hatred.
facts just have a hurtful liberal bias
Republicans need to start their search for a new boogyman.
No one listens anymore, except the like like minded caught in the echo chamber when they rail at length:
'OBAMACARE !!!'
'BENGAZI !!!"
No one listens anymore, except the like like minded caught in the echo chamber when they rail at length:
'OBAMACARE !!!'
'BENGAZI !!!"
1
Mitt, the congenital flip-flopper, wants to be admired if not loved and is always in search of a parade or mob in front of which he can place himself as if doing so makes him a leader.
3
As always, New York Times does it's best to spin. Easiest way to see that there was a huge difference in Romneycare and Obama are, is to look who voted for it. Romney got just about equal votes from both sides, repubs and dems. With Obamacare, not a single republican voted for it. You just have to look at that one stat and you know where were different bills. Romney did reform right, with bilateral support in his own state. Obama shoved it down the rights throte. And then he wonders why everyone opposes it.
2
Comparing apples to oranges. Mitt was governor in a profoundly Democrat state, whose legislature consistently works to better the lives of its residents. President Obama was targeted from day one by obstructionists, whose only goal was to take him down.
4
not a single rep votes for anything obama is for.
just like 100% of reps voted against the deficit reduction bill of 93 which gave us the best econ ever.
you compare whats in something, not by who votes for it, but by the actual content of the something.
Duh
just like 100% of reps voted against the deficit reduction bill of 93 which gave us the best econ ever.
you compare whats in something, not by who votes for it, but by the actual content of the something.
Duh
1
"...Ben Carson, who is leading the latest polls of Iowa Republicans, has declared that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen to America since slavery;". I wouldn't let this guy operate on my dog.
5
Romney was governor at the time that Massachusetts health care was passed, but it was not his idea. In fact he vetoed important parts of the bill, which vetoes were overridden. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform
7
This is what happens when you allow idiot savants get awards and teach. O care which was secretly written with the help of hospitals, drug companies and ONLY Democrats still leaves at least 30 million uninsured. The state exchanges which have eaten up billions of dollars are failing or about to fall. The cost of healthcare had not gone down 2500 You can not keep your own doctor. The panels accepting O care are shrinking and deny access to regions with no participants. . The slowest job recovery in history with more people put off the workforce . A green light for hospital buyouts of practices leading to the death of the doctor working early and late hours for patient care. No change in malpractice or even the promised trial attempts. The best and the brightest going into hedge fund not medicine leading to a doctor shortage. A record number of hospitals declaring bankruptcy. Medical dollars being spent on scribes and regulations with no change on outcomes. All you can do is criticize conservatives who you say don't care if people are sick. What about proposals for HSAs for everyone with basic and catastrophe coverage and you can add your own funds. How about separating insurance from the job. What about stopping 65 year old men like me passing for contraceptives and instead for prostate surveillance. Paul you are a fool. A true idiot savant and a non leader. Save your feeling sorry for Romney. Feel sorry for yourself when you truly need a doctor
3
....with purchase of fries and a Coke.
"...those ads featuring people supposedly hurt by Obamacare have disappeared?"
Well here's one: My premiums for the upcoming year will be TRIPLE what they were before Obamacare. I am 61, unemployed, and cant get assistance because I have savings to live off of.
And as a 61 year old single person with a grown child, it's insulting that I have to pay for pediatric dental care.
Mr. Krugman, you are the ultimate limousine liberal. You care only what the goal looks like, and you could care less about the damage done getting there, so long as it doesn't affect you.
Well here's one: My premiums for the upcoming year will be TRIPLE what they were before Obamacare. I am 61, unemployed, and cant get assistance because I have savings to live off of.
And as a 61 year old single person with a grown child, it's insulting that I have to pay for pediatric dental care.
Mr. Krugman, you are the ultimate limousine liberal. You care only what the goal looks like, and you could care less about the damage done getting there, so long as it doesn't affect you.
2
OK, then vote Republican so they can take away your Social Security and Medicare. Then you'll really be in great shape.
Well Alocksley.. that's because you are comparing a three year old number with the current one.
In the mean time (1) the healthcare inflation usually runs in the teens, or at least in high single digit percentage. (2) You are three years close to the grave (3) You crossed a major age marker -- SIXTY
Add to the above, you could have been mercilessly and unceremoniously kicked out altogether in the old regime from even obtaining insurance.
With the Dems looking out for you, at least Medicare is waiting for you in a few years. If the "let them die" party were in control.. they may actually implement their slogan.
Be a bit more cheerful on the way to your grave. Life is too short, and you cannot carry anything with you to the other side.
In the mean time (1) the healthcare inflation usually runs in the teens, or at least in high single digit percentage. (2) You are three years close to the grave (3) You crossed a major age marker -- SIXTY
Add to the above, you could have been mercilessly and unceremoniously kicked out altogether in the old regime from even obtaining insurance.
With the Dems looking out for you, at least Medicare is waiting for you in a few years. If the "let them die" party were in control.. they may actually implement their slogan.
Be a bit more cheerful on the way to your grave. Life is too short, and you cannot carry anything with you to the other side.
Mitt Romney is yesterday's news and the ACA isn't what it was promised to be. If Mr. Krugman wants to wax nostalgic about a past candidate what about Hillary Clinton in '08 and Howard Dean? Both had better plans than the ACA and Obama screwed things up by not even trying to get Medicare for All to be passed.
And the budgetary issues posed by out of control surveillance/military/police/prison budgets along with the ridiculous embrace of illegal immigration by both parties - while ignoring the significant costs to jobs for citizens and the services they consume at the local and state levels that are very expensive, could be re-directed to provide better funding of health care for citizens.
But you won't hear that from Mr. Krugman or most of the writers or reporters at the NYT. They write reliably pro-Democratic leaning articles that don't take the big picture into account. Voters get it though. And that's why Bernie, Trump and Carson have substantial support. They don't parrot the party lines.
And the budgetary issues posed by out of control surveillance/military/police/prison budgets along with the ridiculous embrace of illegal immigration by both parties - while ignoring the significant costs to jobs for citizens and the services they consume at the local and state levels that are very expensive, could be re-directed to provide better funding of health care for citizens.
But you won't hear that from Mr. Krugman or most of the writers or reporters at the NYT. They write reliably pro-Democratic leaning articles that don't take the big picture into account. Voters get it though. And that's why Bernie, Trump and Carson have substantial support. They don't parrot the party lines.
1
But when will we grow up as a nation an institute Single-Payer Health Care like every other developed nation on earth?
Even Donald Trump acknowledged its virtues. Donald Trump!
Even Donald Trump acknowledged its virtues. Donald Trump!
2
There are many things I dislike about Romney, but this is his WORST quality. Not only does he constantly flip-flop, but he NEVER gives an explanation. It's as if he thinks we are all morons who will lap up everything he says--no matter how contradictory--without question.
2
Dear Mr. Krugman,
Sorry, I'll save my tears for Mr. Romney, the 'champion' of the 1%; he's just another, has been, lesser cog in the grinding machine that has morphed into the GOP/TP/KOCH AFFILIATE organization.
Of course he retracted his statement; he sees the chaos and stupidity of the "Presidential Candidate Clown Car" the Republicans have been nursing along and, perhaps, like some form of "Super Conservative Man " he might be called in to save the election (He did garner 48% of the popular vote in 2012 and might have won the whole thing if somebody in his organization had explained "cell phones" and the "social media" to him).
Otherwise, Mr. Romney is just not "Kochable" enough; they need someone with a mind like Silly Putty and a mouth that will say anything they tell it. Remember, they're "not scientists", the LEAST of their shortcomings!
Sorry, I'll save my tears for Mr. Romney, the 'champion' of the 1%; he's just another, has been, lesser cog in the grinding machine that has morphed into the GOP/TP/KOCH AFFILIATE organization.
Of course he retracted his statement; he sees the chaos and stupidity of the "Presidential Candidate Clown Car" the Republicans have been nursing along and, perhaps, like some form of "Super Conservative Man " he might be called in to save the election (He did garner 48% of the popular vote in 2012 and might have won the whole thing if somebody in his organization had explained "cell phones" and the "social media" to him).
Otherwise, Mr. Romney is just not "Kochable" enough; they need someone with a mind like Silly Putty and a mouth that will say anything they tell it. Remember, they're "not scientists", the LEAST of their shortcomings!
1
"... the [Republican] base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering" says it all.
These people should be cut out of the American body politic like a cancer.
These people should be cut out of the American body politic like a cancer.
3
As should people who are unable to quantify the number of actual states in the union. Your "cancer" is widespread on both the right and the left as comments in this section always confirm.
Dr. Krugman, I'm trying to find the column from 2012 where you praised Mitt Romney for the great manager and leader he is. Could someone please help me find it?
1
Too many people in this country get their "insight" from right wing radio. When I was a high school student we were told that the Russian main newspaper Pravda promoted propaganda in favor of communism. We need more balance in our media, especially radio, if we are going to have a country.
4
Yes, it's a terrible thing that poor Mitt Romney was forced to be a Republican and abandon anything he believed in, pander to the worst instincts in the country, and repeat discredited, dishonest propaganda. He's obviously a victim of a terrible turn of events over which he had no control.
His statements in private saying that he thought 47 percent of the country were lazy moochers whose votes are easily bought off by any politician offering to let them keep freeloading and living the high life on welfare show that he's a compassionate, intelligent man, so clearly it's the party he belongs to that has forced him to act otherwise.
I thought your "I find myself feeling sorry for Mitt Romney" line in the blog post that preceded this column was snark, but the "No, seriously" in this one seemed to imply that you actually mean it. Forgive me if I don't find similar sympathy for this opportunistic, principleless man. Don't forget that in a very real sense, we have him to thank for the entire Benghazi witch hunt. "Please proceed, Governor" should jog the memory of anyone who's forgotten:
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/26/how_the_47_percent_video_started_the_rig...
His statements in private saying that he thought 47 percent of the country were lazy moochers whose votes are easily bought off by any politician offering to let them keep freeloading and living the high life on welfare show that he's a compassionate, intelligent man, so clearly it's the party he belongs to that has forced him to act otherwise.
I thought your "I find myself feeling sorry for Mitt Romney" line in the blog post that preceded this column was snark, but the "No, seriously" in this one seemed to imply that you actually mean it. Forgive me if I don't find similar sympathy for this opportunistic, principleless man. Don't forget that in a very real sense, we have him to thank for the entire Benghazi witch hunt. "Please proceed, Governor" should jog the memory of anyone who's forgotten:
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/26/how_the_47_percent_video_started_the_rig...
91
Facts have a well-known liberal bias. What Romney meant to say was that he's not a doctor or an insurance executive, so he can't say for sure if sick people really exist.
3
The facts don't support your claim, Mr. Cheney. 16 million Americans helped by Obamacare massively outweighs in human terms the cost factor you base your argument on.
If Republicans aren't willing to let John Kasich rise to double digits in the polls, they don't seem likely to accept anyone else who isn't sufficiently whacked out. Maybe if Mitt rode into Iowa with a Winchester in one hand, a Bible in the other, and Obama's scalp under his belt, he might appeal to them more than a Trump or a Cruz.
As for Obamacare, it hasn't lowered the cost of healthcare at all. It has simply distributed it more evenly, which makes it half a failure and hardly a success.
As for Obamacare, it hasn't lowered the cost of healthcare at all. It has simply distributed it more evenly, which makes it half a failure and hardly a success.
"I know several people for whom the Affordable Care Act has been literally a lifesaver."
In fact, I'm one of those people. Dr. Krugman wouldn't remember me, his student 30 years ago at M.I.T.'s Sloan School. When my last job ended, I discovered that no one wants to hire a 59-year-old, regardless of what he knows or what he's done. For me (and others like me), the ACA has been literally a lifesaver.
In fact, I'm one of those people. Dr. Krugman wouldn't remember me, his student 30 years ago at M.I.T.'s Sloan School. When my last job ended, I discovered that no one wants to hire a 59-year-old, regardless of what he knows or what he's done. For me (and others like me), the ACA has been literally a lifesaver.
10
As Bad as You Think Inequality Is, It's Worse!
Please take a moment to write down the answers to two basic questions:
How much do you think the CEO of a large corporation makes in a year, on average?
How much do you think an entry-level factory worker earns in a year, on average?
Your answers allow for the construction of an important statistic about inequality – the wage-gap ratio.
***********
In 1970, for every dollar earned by the average worker, the top 100 CEOs earned on average $45. By 2013 the ratio had jumped to $829 to $1, which is 20 times greater that what the typical American in the survey guessed.
More amazing still is that on average Americans think CEOs of large companies receive about $900,000 per year in compensation, when in reality they receive nearly $30,000,000.
($25,000- average worker to 3 million CEO per year)
As Bad as You Think Inequality Is, It's Worse! | Alternet
http://www.alternet.org/economy/bad-you-think-inequality-its-worse
Please take a moment to write down the answers to two basic questions:
How much do you think the CEO of a large corporation makes in a year, on average?
How much do you think an entry-level factory worker earns in a year, on average?
Your answers allow for the construction of an important statistic about inequality – the wage-gap ratio.
***********
In 1970, for every dollar earned by the average worker, the top 100 CEOs earned on average $45. By 2013 the ratio had jumped to $829 to $1, which is 20 times greater that what the typical American in the survey guessed.
More amazing still is that on average Americans think CEOs of large companies receive about $900,000 per year in compensation, when in reality they receive nearly $30,000,000.
($25,000- average worker to 3 million CEO per year)
As Bad as You Think Inequality Is, It's Worse! | Alternet
http://www.alternet.org/economy/bad-you-think-inequality-its-worse
5
Mr. Krugman, You do yourself a disservice when you do not say the Federal government would initially pay more the Medicare expansion.
The ONLY reason I would be in favor of a Mitt-rehab project is so that it would provide Gail Collins ample opportunities to write more columns about him. Seamus lives!
3
The GOP never watched Sesame Street and the concepts of "over, under, around and through". They started down the cliff and can't turn around even though they see nothing but disaster ahead. This insanity can also be explained by the concept of "conformational bias". Facts aside, there is nothing like having someone to tell you that they agree wholeheartedly with your stated ignorance. That allows a person to feel just so-o-o good about themselves. Welcome to the GOP/Tea Party/Ted Crazy Cruz wings of the party.
3
I think that some republicans would prefer a formal caste system rather than the ad hoc one we are developing.
4
Dr. K, I think you did yourself a disservice by using the term "free money." I understand the context; however, anyone with an IQ above room temperature knows there is no such thing.
Even being a pretty "red" guy in a very red portion of a purple state, I appreciate your writings. The biggest thing that bothers me is that you appear to treat the national debt as many Republicans treat climate change.
I, and I expect many others, would appreciate a column devoted to when, and specifically how, you see us taking that debt to zero. Thank you in advance.
Even being a pretty "red" guy in a very red portion of a purple state, I appreciate your writings. The biggest thing that bothers me is that you appear to treat the national debt as many Republicans treat climate change.
I, and I expect many others, would appreciate a column devoted to when, and specifically how, you see us taking that debt to zero. Thank you in advance.
If we could predict the future, and invest properly in that, I would agree. But when we are in enormous economic & military competition with China, for example, we will fall behind them shortly if we don't become more economically active overseas, continue to build a cyberwar-proof US, and realize that they & Russia will do their best to dominate Asia, the Middle East, Africa & Latin America. We would be left with a non-modernized North America & weak Europe. We fiddle in America, while Rome is beginning to smoulder, in my estimation.
Why have we been so slow in getting universal healthcare compared to other nations? And, based on Mitt's, "I don’t think the common person is getting it," as quoted by R. Law below, how can the media do better in educating the people - as I don't know where else to go, if I'm not getting it? Although, the next problem --- how do you get the news to the people in a format that fits their schedule? The newspaper has always been superior in that aspect, but many can't afford a newspaper. If we have Public Radio and Public TV, have we ever tried a Public Newspaper? The newspapers are online today, but that requires computers, service providers and anti-virus, getting the news can be expensive. I could go on and on, but times is up --- just, don't ever let anyone fault the people, many are doing the best they know how.
Don't cry for Mitt Romney. He, and other establishment Republicans, embraced the lunatics who are currently running the GOP asylum, and refused to call them out when doing so could have stopped the party's descent into chaos.
258
Free Mitt Romney indeed. Let him free himself. One would think that investing a lifetime supporting a political party so toxic and dysfunctional would be a soul-sucking experience. Then again, incredible wealth does have a way of assuaging one's conscience, no?
2
Bush 41 was right on the money that "trickle down" supply side stuff was voodoo economics but then had to embrace that phony policy in order to get elected by the no-nothing base. It's too late for him to be liberated by calling a spade a spade since he thinks it's OK to do anything to get elected. But you have to wonder he doesn't privately smirk when he thinks about the bunk that his reactionary party will fall for.
4
I worked with Bishop Romney in Salt Lake City in 2001-2002 helping to set up First Aid stations for spectators at the Winter Olympiad, I found him to be a warm, approachable guy. (Full disclosure I am a lapsed Catholic who self identifies as an agnostic/atheist-I lived in Utah for 20 years.)
In Utah I didn’t see him as a vulture capitalist. I saw a man who wanted to put his religious home in the very best light possible. He wasn’t comfortable talking with everyday people. His language was stilted when he tried to talk with us middle class folk...top notch colleagues in emergency medicine. But his business acumen was outstanding. He helped us figure out the numbers for the number of medical supplies, how to store and transport them efficiently, how to contract for everything from bulk ordering for splints to getting tents and cots. He was great
He brought in his sons to help and it was wonderful to see his love of his family...even to the point of bouncing his 6 month old grand son on his knee as he worked out strategy for the stations. He was happiest and most content surrounded by family.
That was 2002. Then I watched the train wreck that was his 2012 campaign. Why his team didn’t show this side of Mitt was a shame.
Please, I NEVER considered Mitt Romney as POTUS..his lack of understanding for Main Street families was almost beyond belief. I just wanted to say that he was no Trump or Ted Cruz, men who have NO soul. Mitt just wasn’t a politician. That’s OK.
In Utah I didn’t see him as a vulture capitalist. I saw a man who wanted to put his religious home in the very best light possible. He wasn’t comfortable talking with everyday people. His language was stilted when he tried to talk with us middle class folk...top notch colleagues in emergency medicine. But his business acumen was outstanding. He helped us figure out the numbers for the number of medical supplies, how to store and transport them efficiently, how to contract for everything from bulk ordering for splints to getting tents and cots. He was great
He brought in his sons to help and it was wonderful to see his love of his family...even to the point of bouncing his 6 month old grand son on his knee as he worked out strategy for the stations. He was happiest and most content surrounded by family.
That was 2002. Then I watched the train wreck that was his 2012 campaign. Why his team didn’t show this side of Mitt was a shame.
Please, I NEVER considered Mitt Romney as POTUS..his lack of understanding for Main Street families was almost beyond belief. I just wanted to say that he was no Trump or Ted Cruz, men who have NO soul. Mitt just wasn’t a politician. That’s OK.
284
When I want to know what Mitt Romney thinks I take out a board game spinner.
3
I pray that Bernie get in and starts the revolution.This means dismantling the healthcare mafia.Everyone from revolving door policies ala FDA to industry to wall street scheme ala Valeant pharma and 1000% increases for generics.This includes that other guy, Shrelki. i WORKED BRING THESE COMPANIES PUBLIC.When Wall Street gets involved, profit is the motive, not outcome. The government should be in competition making generics at .25 a pill. Doctors with Ferrari collections and dozens of prominent healthcare cheats, that occupy political and financial postions should be shamed. Heatlhcare is just one of many industries that bad money has driven out good. Time for a change, vote BERNIE!
1
The elephant in the room is Sanders but all Krugman will talk about is Republicans and their deficiencies. Easy points to score while avoiding sanders and very slowly building his case for hillary.
Status-quo/ career economist rooting for a status-quo politcian....
Krugman is no liberal lion, just pretends to be one.....
Status-quo/ career economist rooting for a status-quo politcian....
Krugman is no liberal lion, just pretends to be one.....
1
When Mitt Romney, Mr. 47%, is somewhat defended and a little bit applauded by Paul Krugman we are in very dark times. Mitt a benign alternative? Oh how memory fades.
When Mitt Romney - he who has taken Seamus for a ride on the roof of his car - has become the voice of reason and moderation, it is crystal clear that the GOP has gone off the deep end into an endless abyss.
5
The Republicans like to think of themselves as being grounded in reality, self reliant individuals who do not need to rely upon a lot of others to have what they have, and they want to think that without all those people who rely upon others to get along, their lives and the country would be far better in every way. They simply refuse to accept realities that do not conform with this way of perceiving the world. Not one thing that they have or will ever have is not the result of the collective efforts of everybody in society, they are not living lives that are not interdependent from everyone else, and if the whole does not succeed they are going live in less comfortable and secure affluence, if they are affluent at all.
1
Why do we continually engage in the questions of who governs best when good governance is not subject to whim or philosophical consideration?
Does a baby care who changes the diaper? Who warms the bottle?
Why we go through this wasteful process of electing who should write the checks to whom and for what is beyond me.
That we have the so called freedom of choice as to who should govern certainly reads well in textbooks, but as a matter of practicality the idea of choosing who should pay the bills for the needed repairs, based on a toothy smile, is absurd.
What the men who appear to thoughtfully and with supposed reason claim as a requisite to run our world need to realize is the that their ability to dictate only exists because their fingers are on the triggers of all the killing instruments; a real though hardly reasonable approach to any problems requiring any thought beyond brute force.
Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Romney? Are any of them willing to consider the possibility that force as a means to solve problems involving our earth's ability to provide food, clothing and shelter for all on the planet has never worked?
What is it that their supporters and other world leaders don't get about the rest of us, those who they claim to lead; those they kill?
What is it that commentators who offer criticism, the oft misunderstood means of determining the seed of knowledge from the chaff of ignorance, fail to bring to the table?
"The Emperors Have No Clothes"
Can't anyone see?
Does a baby care who changes the diaper? Who warms the bottle?
Why we go through this wasteful process of electing who should write the checks to whom and for what is beyond me.
That we have the so called freedom of choice as to who should govern certainly reads well in textbooks, but as a matter of practicality the idea of choosing who should pay the bills for the needed repairs, based on a toothy smile, is absurd.
What the men who appear to thoughtfully and with supposed reason claim as a requisite to run our world need to realize is the that their ability to dictate only exists because their fingers are on the triggers of all the killing instruments; a real though hardly reasonable approach to any problems requiring any thought beyond brute force.
Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Romney? Are any of them willing to consider the possibility that force as a means to solve problems involving our earth's ability to provide food, clothing and shelter for all on the planet has never worked?
What is it that their supporters and other world leaders don't get about the rest of us, those who they claim to lead; those they kill?
What is it that commentators who offer criticism, the oft misunderstood means of determining the seed of knowledge from the chaff of ignorance, fail to bring to the table?
"The Emperors Have No Clothes"
Can't anyone see?
So your point is that mainstream Democrats are funded by big business. That's obviously true, but it is also true that Obama and Pelosi are sane and Rubio, Bush and the rest of the republicans are lunatic clowns and are vastly worse than any Democrat. You sound like an intelligent person and should be able to figure that out.
There is a strong belief in the business and political worlds that we are all operating in a zero sum game where we must finely chop and dice to get a small piece of the pie. It leads to some of the very worst decisions. Leaders must free themselves from the bean counters. In a world where only a minority goes to the polls to vote, instead of trying to placate this or that passionate voter by changing positions with the wind or taking the most extreme position, politicians should expand the pie by leading. This is how Obama was elected ... by inspiring many who would not have ordinarily voted to show up at the polls.
It would be refreshing to see a guy like Mitt lead for a change. He is no dummy and he should be proud of his signature accomplishment in Massachusetts. Instead of running away from Romneycare, he should parade it around the Republican party. Instead of being fearful of being called a RINO, he should castigate Republicans for their continuous failures to succeed and to lead. Republicans will continue to lose until they can find leaders that are at least willing to be honest and lead.
It would be refreshing to see a guy like Mitt lead for a change. He is no dummy and he should be proud of his signature accomplishment in Massachusetts. Instead of running away from Romneycare, he should parade it around the Republican party. Instead of being fearful of being called a RINO, he should castigate Republicans for their continuous failures to succeed and to lead. Republicans will continue to lose until they can find leaders that are at least willing to be honest and lead.
"Ben Carson has declared that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen to America since slavery." This is perhaps one of the stupidest things Mr. Carson says - or maybe not. It's a good thing "republican caucus goers" are a tiny little group.
2
Obamacare is the perfect illustration of the Grand Old Prevaricator appeal of failure to the Republican voter base.
The GOP voter base has been so thoroughly conditioned by the Republicans' Joseph Goebbels-style propaganda for 35 years to vote against its own interests that it's always happy, eager and foaming at the mouth to pull the lever at its own economic execution.
Red Republican states have real, live GOP Death Panels that refuse to expand Medicaid, which cause an estimated 7000 premature deaths annually due to a lack of healthcare access.
"Free-dumb" !! ....(to drop dead from stupidity, spite and Republican politics)
Romney's VP choice - Paul Ryan - is a teenaged-minded danger to American economic safety who would shred Social Security, Medicare and the public safety net to ensure that his Ayn Randian modern feudalism and Robber Baron state stays perfectly lubricated with 0.1% tax cut welfare.
A nicer sociopath in Boy Scout clothing you will never meet !
Step on the economic violence accelerator !
America's retrograde right-wing policies have ironically harmed the red welfare Bible states and the Republican voter base the most - where income levels, education levels, health insurance levels are the lowest and teenaged pregnancy, cognitive dissonance levels and FOX-Rush disinformation, spite and 'ill-will toward others' levels are the highest.
Stockholm Syndrome Republican voters need to be freed from their economically violent 'Benghazi' Republican captors.
The GOP voter base has been so thoroughly conditioned by the Republicans' Joseph Goebbels-style propaganda for 35 years to vote against its own interests that it's always happy, eager and foaming at the mouth to pull the lever at its own economic execution.
Red Republican states have real, live GOP Death Panels that refuse to expand Medicaid, which cause an estimated 7000 premature deaths annually due to a lack of healthcare access.
"Free-dumb" !! ....(to drop dead from stupidity, spite and Republican politics)
Romney's VP choice - Paul Ryan - is a teenaged-minded danger to American economic safety who would shred Social Security, Medicare and the public safety net to ensure that his Ayn Randian modern feudalism and Robber Baron state stays perfectly lubricated with 0.1% tax cut welfare.
A nicer sociopath in Boy Scout clothing you will never meet !
Step on the economic violence accelerator !
America's retrograde right-wing policies have ironically harmed the red welfare Bible states and the Republican voter base the most - where income levels, education levels, health insurance levels are the lowest and teenaged pregnancy, cognitive dissonance levels and FOX-Rush disinformation, spite and 'ill-will toward others' levels are the highest.
Stockholm Syndrome Republican voters need to be freed from their economically violent 'Benghazi' Republican captors.
74
Don't expect the attacks on the ACA to stop in this lifetime. Remember, this is the same group that's been attacking Social Security since the 1930s and Medicare since the 1960s and they're still not through. They have a reservoir of hatred that's been building for decades, so long that it's driven them near insane. I'll give you a dollar for every rational thought Ted Cruz or Ben Carson ever had because I know I wouldn't lose a dime.
10
Of course Obama should have tried for a home run with single payer and settled for a single (maybe a walk) to placate the insurance industry and opposition such as joe Lieberman of Hartford, home of the insurance industry. Biggest mistake of his young presidency.
However, the question has not been asked of Republicans in the correct way: "Why do you not want everyone to have health care" as we all know they have no back up ideas or program, just kill the Affordable Care Act and do it with lies such as "death panels" "job killer""not liked" "too expensive", etc.
They obviously do not understand the cost of human suffering is a cost that is too much to pay and it is paid only by the poor.
However, the question has not been asked of Republicans in the correct way: "Why do you not want everyone to have health care" as we all know they have no back up ideas or program, just kill the Affordable Care Act and do it with lies such as "death panels" "job killer""not liked" "too expensive", etc.
They obviously do not understand the cost of human suffering is a cost that is too much to pay and it is paid only by the poor.
3
Obamacare is the free market based Republican alternative to single payer health care. That's why Republicans can't find a replacement. Too bad they can't see into their own logic and discover that Obamacare is the Heritage Foundation creation from their own party.
2
Middle-class people I know complain that their monthly insurance premiums have gone up (some say almost doubled) because of Obamacare. They find the increases onerous and believe that they are the ones funding others' insurance. Another tax on the average, middle-class person. For sure, I'm no expert on this. I would like for you to address this.
The amazing thing is that when Carson babbles out his line about the ACA being worse than slavery, I have not heard a single interviewer ask him the most obvious possible question? "Why?" I'm sure he would have some delusional rationale, but the fact that he (and most other GOP candidates) are never asked to explain or justify their insane statements is a large part of the reason we are where we are.
10
Mr. Obama has (illegally) delayed $130 billion in annual business penalties that will hurt struggling businesses and cost millions of jobs. This is the ticking time bomb of Obamacare.
Throwing facts at them won't help. They are now like a doomsday cult, rather than any kind of political party. They predict the end of the world on a regular basis, and when that doesn't happen, just like in cults, they double down on their beliefs. They don't turn on their leaders, just those who may point out that perhaps they are wrong. It is the strange phenomenon of cognizant dissonance. Ben Carson is their Jim Jones but instead of going off to some far away country to drink his kool aide, they are given air time on the Sunday morning talk shows, legitimizing their insanity.
9
If Obamacare is such a success maybe the real tragedy is that the Democrats rejected it 40 years ago when Nixon proposed a more generous version of it.
Krugmaan: "Ben Carson...has declared that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen to America since slavery; 81 percent of likely Republican caucus-goers say that this statement makes him more attractive..."
The young lady in her early 40s that has been my barber for several years never had health care coverage until the ACA. She could not afford health care coverage, although she knew from what she was experiencing that some medical problems had developed and definitely needed to be brought to the attention of a medical professional.
The ACA with a subsidy and the elimination of the pre-existing condition impediment made health care a reality for her. She enrolled in a plan and got a subsidy. She also learned, after a physical exam, that she was in need of two surgical procedures, procedures that could free her from life-threatening conditions.
She had the two procedures and has not stopped singing the praises of the ACA, a program that brought her liberation from an oppressive condition.
Carson and the "81 percent of likely Republican caucus-goers" will never persuade her that there are any similarities between slavery and the ACA. Anyone seeing an analogy between slavery and the ACA obviously has some twisted notion that slavery and the ACA have similarities.
For Carson and his Iowa supporters that see such an analogy, the "lights" have obviously gone out in an area of the brain needing illumination or they were never on from the get-go.
The young lady in her early 40s that has been my barber for several years never had health care coverage until the ACA. She could not afford health care coverage, although she knew from what she was experiencing that some medical problems had developed and definitely needed to be brought to the attention of a medical professional.
The ACA with a subsidy and the elimination of the pre-existing condition impediment made health care a reality for her. She enrolled in a plan and got a subsidy. She also learned, after a physical exam, that she was in need of two surgical procedures, procedures that could free her from life-threatening conditions.
She had the two procedures and has not stopped singing the praises of the ACA, a program that brought her liberation from an oppressive condition.
Carson and the "81 percent of likely Republican caucus-goers" will never persuade her that there are any similarities between slavery and the ACA. Anyone seeing an analogy between slavery and the ACA obviously has some twisted notion that slavery and the ACA have similarities.
For Carson and his Iowa supporters that see such an analogy, the "lights" have obviously gone out in an area of the brain needing illumination or they were never on from the get-go.
337
Suffering helps the billionaire class. The more desperate the populace is, the less they will be able to bargain for better working conditions, and the Republicans have brilliantly managed to lay the seeds of cynicism amongst their own electorate, railing against the failures of government because they fail to govern. It's an Atlas Shrugged fantasy of the far right with all the major heroes and villains swapping clothes.
1
Aside from greed and the narrative of entitlement that his beliefs justify, Mitt Romney would be an effective public servant if he could distance himself from the racist, misogynist, climate change deniers, who would rather starve a thousand children than let one welfare cheat buy a steak.
The earnest hysteria of Trey Gowdy, the "American Psycho" grin and philosophy of Paul Ryan, and the plodding Turtle, Mitch McConnell are meshing in the American consciousness. What is beginning to emerge is the creep factor. Sure, they lie about lowering taxes and supply side economics, sure they love fetuses but just hate feeding babies, sure they really want more wars anywhere, but now they are fronting a Black surgeon who disbelieves evolution, science, and thinks the ACA is worse than slavery, a bizarre mogul whose claim to fame is his claim to fame, a failed woman executive, the brother of the worst President in history, and a Canadian evangelical. What is going on? This is a nightmare! Mitt looks great compared to these misanthropes.
I have been waiting for the real Republicans to escape from the dungeon they have been held. Maybe Mitt.... it is probably too late for Republicans to get serious about participating in the government. The so called Freedom Caucus strives for dictatorship, like the Brown Shirts of Wiemar Germany. Democracy is the enemy to the Freedom Caucus. Mitt? Only Eisenhower could save the day. Is there anyone like him in the Republican Party? John Danforth? Nah
The earnest hysteria of Trey Gowdy, the "American Psycho" grin and philosophy of Paul Ryan, and the plodding Turtle, Mitch McConnell are meshing in the American consciousness. What is beginning to emerge is the creep factor. Sure, they lie about lowering taxes and supply side economics, sure they love fetuses but just hate feeding babies, sure they really want more wars anywhere, but now they are fronting a Black surgeon who disbelieves evolution, science, and thinks the ACA is worse than slavery, a bizarre mogul whose claim to fame is his claim to fame, a failed woman executive, the brother of the worst President in history, and a Canadian evangelical. What is going on? This is a nightmare! Mitt looks great compared to these misanthropes.
I have been waiting for the real Republicans to escape from the dungeon they have been held. Maybe Mitt.... it is probably too late for Republicans to get serious about participating in the government. The so called Freedom Caucus strives for dictatorship, like the Brown Shirts of Wiemar Germany. Democracy is the enemy to the Freedom Caucus. Mitt? Only Eisenhower could save the day. Is there anyone like him in the Republican Party? John Danforth? Nah
1
From the vantage point of the antipodes the Republican opposition to affordable healthcare is inexplicable – until you reflect on the fact that successive conservative governments in Australia have tried to undermine the system introduced by the Labor Party under Gough Whitlam.
It's passing strange that conservatives in both hemispheres are so enraged by the idea of ordinary people, indeed all people, have access to medical assistance. In the end it saves a lot of money if you have some kind of scheme like Obamacare or Medicare.
Don't get me started on the guns thing . . .
It's passing strange that conservatives in both hemispheres are so enraged by the idea of ordinary people, indeed all people, have access to medical assistance. In the end it saves a lot of money if you have some kind of scheme like Obamacare or Medicare.
Don't get me started on the guns thing . . .
2
Dr. Krugman has a knack for distilling political strategies into clear statements of purpose. That, "The base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering," is one of these pithy statements.
If only this could move toward motive or understanding. As a strategy, demonizing successful democratic, Big Government programs is an obvious rhetorical device. But as a matter of practical need..... Forget dog whistle rhetoric and polling for a moment. What makes a governor refuse federal money to help his own budget.....and provide an otherwise unaffordable basic service to his own constituents?
If only this could move toward motive or understanding. As a strategy, demonizing successful democratic, Big Government programs is an obvious rhetorical device. But as a matter of practical need..... Forget dog whistle rhetoric and polling for a moment. What makes a governor refuse federal money to help his own budget.....and provide an otherwise unaffordable basic service to his own constituents?
1
Because Obamacare was destined to be a huge success providing millions of previously uninsured Americans access to health insurance is the reason why Republicans were so vehemently against it in the first place.
1
Imagine how much can change in just a few years. Mitt Romney who represented main street Conservative while winking at Wall St. hucksters is starting to seem nostalgically attractive in hindsight. Instead, we have outsiders angling for the top govt. position in the land with absolutely no experience working in government. Dr. Ben Carson claims that his experience running a neuro pediatric department & one year stint on Fox News is enough padding on his resume to secure the job as long as he surrounds himself with smart advisers. Trump believes that his experience as a mega business person building a harem of resort hotels, Trump clothing line & reality TV chops guarantee his "negotiator in chief" status. Poor whining Jeb! is upset because he was sure that his family brand name & stint as governor would guarantee him the Presidency, not daring to pull his head out of the sand to gauge the public's anger about government. Ted Cruz is flying on exhaust fumes from Donald Trump & the Tea Party's outrage by shift shaping into whatever the public wants to see miraculously by mentioning code words like Planned Parenthood, baby killers, 2nd amendment, eliminate the IRS & EPA, anti gays, climate change deniers, etc. which are all fodder to unite his untamed Republican blue collar base. In fact, if Jesus were to be resurrected in time for the Presidential election, as the 7th Day Adventists believe, on the day of the Second Coming, he would surely run as a Tea Party Conservative.
2
Here's the very sad reality, facts just don't matter for the GOP base, and if they don't want to they never have to face them.
Today, regardless of your bias, it's completely possible to exist in a media bubble where all you ever hear is what you want to hear and believe. And there is an endless parade of charlatans eager to promote any canard which supports the notion that the government is incompetent and that government spending doesn't create jobs unless they are paying for obsolete weapons programs and Military Bases. They never haves to hear the other side, they hop from TV to the internet to the radio and the bookstore never once venturing outside their world of make believe where Climate Change is a hoax and the Theory of Evolution a farce. These were the killers of The Fairness Doctrine who made their world possible.
So when people are required to buy private health insurance from private insurance companies and see private doctors they get to call it "Government run" because it's mandated by law. So to that base, Romney taking credit for a successful "government program" solidifies his legacy as a traitor.
It's incumbent on all of us to expose ourselves to the other side's point of view. That includes understanding your bias and the bias of the source, and filtering the information accordingly. Exposing yourself to other opinions allows you to validate your own, and more importantly, let's you know what's out there and what you face. It's anti-know nothingism.
Today, regardless of your bias, it's completely possible to exist in a media bubble where all you ever hear is what you want to hear and believe. And there is an endless parade of charlatans eager to promote any canard which supports the notion that the government is incompetent and that government spending doesn't create jobs unless they are paying for obsolete weapons programs and Military Bases. They never haves to hear the other side, they hop from TV to the internet to the radio and the bookstore never once venturing outside their world of make believe where Climate Change is a hoax and the Theory of Evolution a farce. These were the killers of The Fairness Doctrine who made their world possible.
So when people are required to buy private health insurance from private insurance companies and see private doctors they get to call it "Government run" because it's mandated by law. So to that base, Romney taking credit for a successful "government program" solidifies his legacy as a traitor.
It's incumbent on all of us to expose ourselves to the other side's point of view. That includes understanding your bias and the bias of the source, and filtering the information accordingly. Exposing yourself to other opinions allows you to validate your own, and more importantly, let's you know what's out there and what you face. It's anti-know nothingism.
3
As a Massachusetts resident, may I suggest a possible remedy for the prevalent Republican mental malaise. Whenever a Republican serves as governor here, he performs well, raises few hackles, and is usually remembered as fondly as most former Democratic governors are. The only hitch might be that we'd have to shorten our gubernatorial term to one year to accomadate all those in need of therapy.
1
I think Dr. Krugman has gone around this track before. Most who read his columns understand that the current cadre of leaders in the Republican Party HATE everything to do with government regulation and government funded and administered programs. Repeating the story does not enlighten us about why this is so.
While the fear and loathing of Republicans toward government expresses itself in economic terms, the fear and loathing does not originate there. The fact is that the Republican party is now populated by a fanatical group of religious fanatics. And no, I am not speaking of so-called 'Evangelicals' Rather, I am speaking of gnostics in secular drag. Their modern secular scripture of the gnostic myth is demonstrated in Ayn Rand's 'Atlas Shrugged'--a story of a corrupt society saved by a group who knows what the true reality of society is--unrelieved competition--and under the leadership of John Galt, they engineer the collapse of the old corrupt order and initiate a new Golden Age led by the new Gnostic elite.
This narrative is now the core myth of the Republican party and no amount of economic 'straight talk' is going to change their convictions in this matter. So, what the Republican party has become is a dangerous religious sect, albeit dressed in secular drag. I don't think Americans want to face this fact.
Pity. Germany, Italy and Russia also dismissed earlier incarnations of this same sect....
While the fear and loathing of Republicans toward government expresses itself in economic terms, the fear and loathing does not originate there. The fact is that the Republican party is now populated by a fanatical group of religious fanatics. And no, I am not speaking of so-called 'Evangelicals' Rather, I am speaking of gnostics in secular drag. Their modern secular scripture of the gnostic myth is demonstrated in Ayn Rand's 'Atlas Shrugged'--a story of a corrupt society saved by a group who knows what the true reality of society is--unrelieved competition--and under the leadership of John Galt, they engineer the collapse of the old corrupt order and initiate a new Golden Age led by the new Gnostic elite.
This narrative is now the core myth of the Republican party and no amount of economic 'straight talk' is going to change their convictions in this matter. So, what the Republican party has become is a dangerous religious sect, albeit dressed in secular drag. I don't think Americans want to face this fact.
Pity. Germany, Italy and Russia also dismissed earlier incarnations of this same sect....
4
May I tell you a story about 2 Fox news zombies in their early sixties that I know.
After marrying later in life they bought a home during the bubble which they should never have qualified for. Only one had a "job" teaching exercise classes, the other had been laid off from the banking industry but was collecting unemployment. They took advantage of the lack of scrutiny and moved into this home. He was able to find a job, but seemed to loose them frequently. He was then diagnosed with cancer (luckily while insured) and went through expensive surgery and radiation treatments. He was able to move to a new job and get insurance even with a cancer diagnosis thanks to the ACA. Meanwhile, she fell and broke her arm so no more "job". Workers comp payments began to arrive and she liked it. Free money! So instead of really trying to recover she dragged her heals and held out for a law suit which followed. She confided to me that she liked getting the money every month and not having to work for it.
So how are these people who made it through cancer, injury and the housing bubble economic disaster because of the ACA and other government programs like workers comp, unemployment insurance and disability payments able to justify their using these programs meant to help, and still refer to Those People as if they are not a member?
After marrying later in life they bought a home during the bubble which they should never have qualified for. Only one had a "job" teaching exercise classes, the other had been laid off from the banking industry but was collecting unemployment. They took advantage of the lack of scrutiny and moved into this home. He was able to find a job, but seemed to loose them frequently. He was then diagnosed with cancer (luckily while insured) and went through expensive surgery and radiation treatments. He was able to move to a new job and get insurance even with a cancer diagnosis thanks to the ACA. Meanwhile, she fell and broke her arm so no more "job". Workers comp payments began to arrive and she liked it. Free money! So instead of really trying to recover she dragged her heals and held out for a law suit which followed. She confided to me that she liked getting the money every month and not having to work for it.
So how are these people who made it through cancer, injury and the housing bubble economic disaster because of the ACA and other government programs like workers comp, unemployment insurance and disability payments able to justify their using these programs meant to help, and still refer to Those People as if they are not a member?
5
Why does Romney care about becoming president? He was a successful governor and he is rich, albeit by buying. raping and destroying companies and laying people off. Now What? He wants to do the same to the only thing protecting you and me from having our homes and savings raided, the US Government? Are we really going to trust someone like him to be president? Already we are paying high taxes to enrich the rich even more: The military budget, unpaid for continuous wars, the corporate give-aways with no accountability. Americans are fools to support the likes of him for government. Once we believed in electing people of good character and good ethics who believed in the American dream. Sure there are lots of examples of bad governorship and corrupt politicians. Once they were found out and especially if they hurt the common good we booted them out. Now we seek out people of bad character to run under the pretense of they are good businessmen. Hardly, when they get in trouble and do the wrong thing now it is more and more the middle class that takes it for the team while the criminals go free with no penalties and in fact get bigger tax breaks huge bonus's, with lucrative jobs for those that let them get away. Romney's Bain Capital mentality will be a bane to this country as a president handing out gifts to the rich, raping, as Bain did to companies, the middle class of their tax monies and assets. It is his own power lust that keeps him from touting his greatest achievement.
6
Mr. Krugman
I disagree with your statement: "the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering."
I think its about being willing to spend money to make us afraid. Of illness, Injury, people who don't look like us, sex, poverty in old age, unsafe cars, changes in the economy, electric cars, not having a gun, other people with a gun.
Just plain afraid.
I disagree with your statement: "the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering."
I think its about being willing to spend money to make us afraid. Of illness, Injury, people who don't look like us, sex, poverty in old age, unsafe cars, changes in the economy, electric cars, not having a gun, other people with a gun.
Just plain afraid.
6
Good article by sir Paul, economist turned journalist, and a strong voice for the left. As an avid reader of both the NYT and the opposing WSJ, ever since the Lehman event, followed by the necessity for western economies to be managed by Central Bankers, I first concluded how they have instituted control, was to stave off a depression. Then of course by many names, we are lvivg through the so called great recession, or now a period of muted GDP, and zero interest rates. All in all, it seems apparent Post WW 2 curtain has come down. Western Democracies have little choice but to institute The Social Democratic Welfare State Model as the new mantra. Is so obvious millions will have to be cared for by the stste re-distributing wealth. Not our past Capitalism model. That is why the so called GOP may be obsolete. The GOP has zero to offer the Social Democratic Welfare State Model. A model that requires the state to re-distribute wealth. What is also happening is productivity gains will all but disappear.
2
You are wasting your pity on a man who was a corporate pirate for many years and thought he could lie and buy the office of POTUS, his piratical stench notwithstanding. Both Romneycare and Obamacare subsidize insurance giants which are monopolizing healthcare and are still causing our healthcare to be the most expensive in the world, but far from the best. The only way to make universal healthcare work is single payer, same as all the more successful systems in the world. We need to sweep away the entrenched moneyed interests that dominate our society and government, and return power, and wealth, to the entire spectrum of American society. Viva la revolucion! Vote Bernie.
7
The ACA eliminated life-time caps on coverage. It eliminated pre-existing conditions restrictions. It limits insurers' ability to impose age-related premium increases for private coverage. Adult children up to age 26 can now continue to get health insurance on their parent's policies. And health insurers must spend at least 85 percent of their premium dollars on health care (80 percent for smaller group plans) or rebate shortfalls to consumers.
I say that's a win-win for the great majority of Americans.
I say that's a win-win for the great majority of Americans.
8
The Republicans are delusional about the public not needing health care. How any of those guys get elected is beyond me. The only reason most have jobs is the gerrymandering of districts. The people are fighting it, the politicians are fighting it and the courts are fighting it. The problem is we have 5 more years before we have another chance to straighten out some of these states as the glacial pace of trying to get valid reform is only now taking effect in some places after almost 5 years.
4
Krugman: "Ben Carson, who is leading the latest polls of Iowa Republicans, has declared that Obamacare is the worst thing to happen to America since slavery..."
While teaching a few adult education courses before retirement, I soon came to realize that the brightest students in the class were those that could see and make analogies, i.e.,having the ability to see that two different things have some similarities, are alike in some ways.
Anyone seeing an analogy of slavery to the ACA -- i.e.,access to health care never previously available to millions that can liberate individuals from health conditions capable of destroying their lives -- obviously have problems with analogies.
For people with this strange perception, the "lights" have either gone out in an area needing illumination or the "lights" were never on, unfortunately.
While teaching a few adult education courses before retirement, I soon came to realize that the brightest students in the class were those that could see and make analogies, i.e.,having the ability to see that two different things have some similarities, are alike in some ways.
Anyone seeing an analogy of slavery to the ACA -- i.e.,access to health care never previously available to millions that can liberate individuals from health conditions capable of destroying their lives -- obviously have problems with analogies.
For people with this strange perception, the "lights" have either gone out in an area needing illumination or the "lights" were never on, unfortunately.
234
Today's GOP/TeaParty not only has problems with analogies, but has perverted language into its very opposite in meaning.
I keep reading that copays are high under Obamacare but my copay under Obamacare is fifteen hundred dollars. Since I needed a 40,000 dollar operation, that wasn't bad at all. Without that operation, I'd be in a wheelchair now so I have nothing but praise for Obamacare.
And people keep saying it hurts jobs. Every business I go into over in the nearby college town has signs reading, "Now Hiring." Maybe they'll not million dollar a year jobs but there are a lot of them and they're all over, department stores, restaurants, big box stores. The hand-full of factories left in town have "Hiring" banners flapping out front. For a job killer Obamacare seems to be creating jobs.
And people keep saying it hurts jobs. Every business I go into over in the nearby college town has signs reading, "Now Hiring." Maybe they'll not million dollar a year jobs but there are a lot of them and they're all over, department stores, restaurants, big box stores. The hand-full of factories left in town have "Hiring" banners flapping out front. For a job killer Obamacare seems to be creating jobs.
2
The best thing that Mitt Romney and others like him, such as David Brooks and Ross Douthat writing for the NYT, can do for U.S. Politics is abandon their ship and start over. The Republican party can't be saved. The GOP is owned by a radical base in multiple states that, despite being a minority, deceives itself, by the magic of gerrymandering, into believing is much larger than they are.
The U.S. needs an authentic second voice. The Republican Party isn't it. They've retrenched themselves in a jingoiistic, racist, fearful, chauvinistic, religiously fanatic past that the U.S. has spent a hundred years evolving out of. Maybe Mitt and others can ignite one.
But I doubt it. I think he and others are getting the leaky ark they've built since the days of the Dixiecrats. Regardless, stay on that ship, Mitt, and you go down on what amounts to a Somali pirate vessel, not the S.S. United States you think you're on.
.
The U.S. needs an authentic second voice. The Republican Party isn't it. They've retrenched themselves in a jingoiistic, racist, fearful, chauvinistic, religiously fanatic past that the U.S. has spent a hundred years evolving out of. Maybe Mitt and others can ignite one.
But I doubt it. I think he and others are getting the leaky ark they've built since the days of the Dixiecrats. Regardless, stay on that ship, Mitt, and you go down on what amounts to a Somali pirate vessel, not the S.S. United States you think you're on.
.
18
Its not free money if somebody else pays for it. I write not in opposition to what is stated but so that we understand how we cover all of our expenses. No government has free money to give out; rather, it serves to portion our varied interests.
"...the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering." The towering, signature accomplishment of the Reagan Revolution: harnessing fear and resentment to convince low income voters to harm not only themselves but, even worse, their own children, in order to harm those even more in need. Amazing.
319
While I appreciate the sentiment, it is difficult to conjure up much sympathy for anyone from the Republican side of American politics in the last couple of decades who used the crazy side of the party when expedient, and now finds himself (or herself) tossed aside as the asylum is taken over completely by the faction the rest of us have always seen as odious.
7
Paul Krugman writes of people, including people in the middle class or above, whose lives have been saved by the Affordable Care Act. The proscription against denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions, and the proscription against cutting off coverage as soon as the insured gets sick are currently saving both the physical and financial health of many families, including mine.
9
Success?
We got a letter from Carefirst last week. Our plan for myself, my wife, and my daughter, will now be $1300/month. The deductible is going to $9000/year. This is after a 30% increase last year. We have no medical problems. This is a bronze plan, the bottom of the barrel. In a year my daughter will be 26 and will have to be on her own. She has an arts degree, works hard, but has no excess income. I suspect she'll be uncovered and can only pray she'll be healthy.
We have our own small (just the two of us) business. This is all cash out of pocket.
Success? What would failure look like.
We got a letter from Carefirst last week. Our plan for myself, my wife, and my daughter, will now be $1300/month. The deductible is going to $9000/year. This is after a 30% increase last year. We have no medical problems. This is a bronze plan, the bottom of the barrel. In a year my daughter will be 26 and will have to be on her own. She has an arts degree, works hard, but has no excess income. I suspect she'll be uncovered and can only pray she'll be healthy.
We have our own small (just the two of us) business. This is all cash out of pocket.
Success? What would failure look like.
77
Apparently your 'small businesses' are bringing in pretty good revenue. But don't worry about your daughter: the ACA includes a safety net for those with lower earnings, including premium subsidies (it's cheaper, if you take the broad view, to provide premium subsidies to those with low earnings than it is to wait for them to get seriously ill and have to pay for more expensive treatment), so she'll be OK.
The reason it is considered a success is because people with pre existing conditions who were denied coverage (I had none between 2000 and 2013) can now buy coverage. It might not be affordable, but it is certainly more affordable than having no insurance and paying for everything out of pocket like I used to do. That usually leads to bankruptcy.
"What would failure look like?"
It would look like what we had before the ACA, where the story would have been much worse for your daughter. The problems you mention were not caused by the ACA, but instead by the health insurance system. The ACA made those already existing problems less severe by making it so your family plan would cover your daughter until she was 26 (not required before the ACA), and providing her with a subsidy so that insurance will be within reach for her when she's 27, which it wouldn't have been without the subsidy. And if she ever saw a psychologist for depression, got a concussion with long-term consequences, developed diabetes, etc., before being able to afford insurance, the ACA made it so that insurance companies could not charge her sky-high rates, or deny her coverage for what would have then counted as pre-existing conditions.
Your cost complaints are valid. But the culprit is not the ACA.
It would look like what we had before the ACA, where the story would have been much worse for your daughter. The problems you mention were not caused by the ACA, but instead by the health insurance system. The ACA made those already existing problems less severe by making it so your family plan would cover your daughter until she was 26 (not required before the ACA), and providing her with a subsidy so that insurance will be within reach for her when she's 27, which it wouldn't have been without the subsidy. And if she ever saw a psychologist for depression, got a concussion with long-term consequences, developed diabetes, etc., before being able to afford insurance, the ACA made it so that insurance companies could not charge her sky-high rates, or deny her coverage for what would have then counted as pre-existing conditions.
Your cost complaints are valid. But the culprit is not the ACA.
It is appropriate that the Affordable Care Act be known as Obamacare, a term originally meant to be a slur but will ensure that President Obama is honored for a major achievement of his Administration.
And if as increasingly looks likely Donald Trump wins the election, he will likely expand the program as would Hillary Clinton or Bernard Sanders.
This is the way Social Security evolved. First, part of the work force and then most.
Governor Romney should lay claim to his achievement in Massachusetts for it is significant.
And if as increasingly looks likely Donald Trump wins the election, he will likely expand the program as would Hillary Clinton or Bernard Sanders.
This is the way Social Security evolved. First, part of the work force and then most.
Governor Romney should lay claim to his achievement in Massachusetts for it is significant.
4
The bloom fell off the rose of Mitt's Massachusetts governorship very early. After bullying Jane Swift, the acting governor, into withdrawing from any race, he convinced the people of the Bay State that he was an old-fashioned, moderate Republican, a la William Weld, Olympia Snowe and Margaret Chase Smith -- one who would be sensible in fiscal matters, but liberal when it came to human rights issues, such as a woman's right to privacy and choice. After his inauguration, his tune changed, and things went downhill fast. He declared that he had an "evolution", and was now solidly anti-choice. He slashed funds for the poor and homeless, turned adult long-term mental patients out on the streets, and fought bitterly against the newly-handed down, profoundly ground-breaking human rights decision on gay marriage. He finally left town after two years, ostensibly to begin his presidential campaign, and ruled in absentia for the rest of his term. He most decidedly would NOT have been reelected. His one shining legacy is Romneycare... which he couldn't get away from fast enough during the 2012 campaign. Every move he makes is calculated. PLEASE: pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!
16
I recently went for an injection by a nurse-practitioner for an arthritic knee. The appointment took five to ten minutes. The cost of the medication itself was $37. The hospital charged over $1300 to our health insurance. No health care system can truly succeed as long as such obscenity prevails.
601
Lost in Space: Curious as to why you went to a hospital for this injection - would the same service have been available in a doctor's office?
1
Mitt Romney is a big liar. Yet, he also should be thrilled to be out of politics. He's a reasonable liar. I live in Massachusetts part time. He was ineffective and the healthcare initiative was forced upon him at a time where the barometer of his presidential aspirations pointed to healthcare as a good feather in his cap. This was just before the crazies took over the Republican Party nationally. He moved to Massachusetts a state he was never at ease in, simply to win the moderate Republican and conservative democrats nationwide. What he didn't see coming was the extremists in his own party that find sensible effective legislation the enemy of their twisted utopian vision. The vision of tea partiers and religious fanatics in the "Republican Party" should be on the Federal list of terror groups, as their goal is to bring down the United States. They've tried to cause default of our economic system, lacking a true understanding of how debt and spending works. They've never heard of Milton Friedman or the Keynesian system. They exhibit subhuman intelligence and are proud of it.
1
Mitt Romney never deserved to be President. The statements you relate explain just why. He is unable to tell the truth as he sees it. The two most important qualities of any President are curiosity -- a drive to discover truth -- and integrity -- the courage to speak the truth and take the actions truth demands. Surely the truth often is difficult to discover and unwelcome news to many. Surely, leaders make mistakes and take unwise actions. Without integrity they cannot hope to make the choices and take the actions needed to lead through difficult times.
1
Romney only appears to get things done. Having seen him in the business world and in local politics, his judgement on anything except rigid stripping value from acquisitions is questionable. Not a maker even with companies that could produce. There were a lot of failed efforts staffed by totally inexperienced MBAs with no technical or real world business experience never seemed to make the news. Paper and Harvard case studies do not make money or things. He is a naive silver spooner, not a doer.
1
"It’s not about how much it costs in taxpayer funds or economic impact: the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering."
How true, and how tragically sad! It reminds me of what a great atheist had to say on the subject of love and hate. I am sure the quote is not 100% accurate, but the gist absolutely is.
The good life is guided by knowledge and inspired by love. Love is better than hate because when two people love one another, the success of one is the success of the other, whereas when they hate one another, the success of one is the failure of the other. -- Bertrand Russell.
How true, and how tragically sad! It reminds me of what a great atheist had to say on the subject of love and hate. I am sure the quote is not 100% accurate, but the gist absolutely is.
The good life is guided by knowledge and inspired by love. Love is better than hate because when two people love one another, the success of one is the success of the other, whereas when they hate one another, the success of one is the failure of the other. -- Bertrand Russell.
2
Obamacare is the worst thing that's ever happened to me. I have a part-time job (still looking for full-time) and make just enough money (slightly over four times the poverty rate) that I don't qualify for ACA subsidies, so I buy my insurance on the private market.
My premium has jumped from $500 a month to $900 a month since Obamacare started, and my annual out-of-pocket maximum went from $2500 to $4000 (which I spend every year, due to chronic conditions). Approximately 40% of my income now goes to medical care.
The entire Sutter Health system (dominant in norther CA) no longer accepts my insurance , so I can no longer use their doctors and lab services that I need.
Prior to the ACA, I was on a California HIPAA plan, which protected people with pre-existing conditions and was cost-contained. Now this plan no longer exists.
Paul, before you declare the ACA a success, you need to interview all the part-time, self-employed, and chronically ill Americans and see how much harm the ACA has caused.
My premium has jumped from $500 a month to $900 a month since Obamacare started, and my annual out-of-pocket maximum went from $2500 to $4000 (which I spend every year, due to chronic conditions). Approximately 40% of my income now goes to medical care.
The entire Sutter Health system (dominant in norther CA) no longer accepts my insurance , so I can no longer use their doctors and lab services that I need.
Prior to the ACA, I was on a California HIPAA plan, which protected people with pre-existing conditions and was cost-contained. Now this plan no longer exists.
Paul, before you declare the ACA a success, you need to interview all the part-time, self-employed, and chronically ill Americans and see how much harm the ACA has caused.
1
Romneycare was born at a time when some Republicans still had ideas about solutions for some of the bigger problems of the general population. I used to think Republicans hate it because they aren't interested in the general population anymore, but I now think that's not going far enough--they actually hat the general population (or at least immigrants, minorities, gays, children, the elderly, women, the environment and world peace).
And as long as a Democrat is in the White House, Republicans will oppose any and all efforts to govern effectively--anything less would mean some measure of success for the sitting Democrat, something they consider intolerable.
And as long as a Democrat is in the White House, Republicans will oppose any and all efforts to govern effectively--anything less would mean some measure of success for the sitting Democrat, something they consider intolerable.
4
Well, with respect to Romney's rather startling epiphany, I'd say, that based on his history of stunning reversals, it was nothing new to scoff at. He simply realized at this late date his political career could not be resurrected under any improbable circumstance. And then the walk back was simply paying homage to the "improbable." What we learned four years ago, was his inherent contempt for human nature and humanity in general, emanating from an uncontrollable thirst for power. I'm not saying the man doesn't go to church, isn't good to his kids, neighbors etc. , I am referring to his public persona, which he himself constructed using his "business experience" as a model. And, Romney's business model was nothing more than elitism; getting and taking unfair advantage of the situation. So compassion, in my opinion would not be the appropriate emotion. As for the ACA, its real difficulties lay not in its lofty goals, some of which were achieved, but in the exceedingly painful process of implementation, which has left our society polarized, seeming beyond repair. Liberals will continue to travel the "Via Dolorosa" of human progress and the Mitt Romney's of the world will always be washing their hands.
2
Your most important point that I perceived is the refusal of Federal funds for insuring people through Medicaid, the state's health insurance programs for poor people.
Whatever happened to "Compassionate Conservative"?..........no such thing.
The State's Republican leaders got to be that way by pandering to their followers hatred of others, especially those "That don't help themselves".
The Republican party has morphed from a gathering of "Self-sufficient accomplished people", to downright hateful ones.
I actually disapprove of government mandated health insurance as contrary to the idea of freedom, but I am also practical and caring, seeing the need to help my fellow citizens. The ACA has been a great success with 16 million newly insured. Consider the proportion of those who were saved.
Now watch out for price increases as has happened with the Medicare Part D drug coverage. It is inevitable that collusion of some sort between the health insurance companies will take place.
Incidentally, like the Part D drug program that relies on private insurance companies, so does the ACA, so why are the Republicans still bellowing hatred of the ACA? It's a windfall for the private insurance companies, just like the Republicans wanted.
Whatever happened to "Compassionate Conservative"?..........no such thing.
The State's Republican leaders got to be that way by pandering to their followers hatred of others, especially those "That don't help themselves".
The Republican party has morphed from a gathering of "Self-sufficient accomplished people", to downright hateful ones.
I actually disapprove of government mandated health insurance as contrary to the idea of freedom, but I am also practical and caring, seeing the need to help my fellow citizens. The ACA has been a great success with 16 million newly insured. Consider the proportion of those who were saved.
Now watch out for price increases as has happened with the Medicare Part D drug coverage. It is inevitable that collusion of some sort between the health insurance companies will take place.
Incidentally, like the Part D drug program that relies on private insurance companies, so does the ACA, so why are the Republicans still bellowing hatred of the ACA? It's a windfall for the private insurance companies, just like the Republicans wanted.
4
If it is true that "the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering," as it clearly is, then it would be fair to say that "the base," from as objective a standpoint as ethical judgment ever has, is evil. Satan would be proud. If any persons can be fairly, objectively called evil, they can. If we do not subscribe to utter moral relativism, in which no ethical judgment can ever be objectively made, isn't it past time to recognize the current Republican "base" as evil, and say so? Yes, they also have guns. And they're evil.
1
Unfortunately, your appraisal of Mitt seems to be correct. I, too, could never understand his stand against Obama care since it was his idea, but that's at another time when he had presidential ambitions. With the current crop of right wing candidates he could run as a Democrat because as you said he wants to get things done. What frightens me is the working class myopia. They are focused on the poor and the near poor. Just yesterday at a gathering I attended, I talked to a working woman who was outraged because couples living together with children remained unmarried so the woman could get food stamps. The presumption is that if they married, they wouldn't be qualified. Ask her about Corporate greed and tax avoidance and one is greeted with a blank stare. Ask about the top one percent in the economy and she doesn't care. She can only focus on that mother who is "ripping us off." And yes, she will vote Republican no matter which one gets nominated. She also had a rant against illegal workers who "live off welfare." They get free medical care while she has to pay for her insurance. She thinks Trump has it right. And so she will vote against her best personal interest because she has a blind side that energizes from hate which somehow makes her feel better. There is no causal relationship between her existence and the economy and those who control it. So yes, let's free Mitt, but my acquaintance is in self inflicted misery without knowing it. Nothing can free her.
5
I have spoken with a number of folks in rural Michigan who echo the rants Paul describes by low-wage working families against folks who use government assistance to get by. The hate does not make these folks feel better, so much as provide an outlet for frustration that they work hard and struggle to make ends meet, and HAVE to believe that they have control over their own destinies (so others do to and should not mooch on them). Some of this has racist undertones, of course. Some of it is "crabs in a barrel". But I wonder if much of it does not come from an unrecognized belief that there is no point in railing against the 10% or 1% or whatever.
When you have one major party--the Republicans--now dedicated to the proposition that government should only work for the wealthy few at the expense of everyone else, you have a political civil war that has been raging throughout the Obama Administration. That war is being waged by a new breed of anti-government, primarily white Southern radicals both within the Republican Party, but most importantly it has stood from "Day One" solidly against every major domestic initiative of Mr. Obama with an anti- "defund" scorched-earth policy that would rather see the government default on its debt or shutdown than provide health care for the many, or a step toward peace with Iran by containing nuclear weapons proliferation, or immigration reform, or efforts to address climate change. It's a political rebellion that wants to destroy America and perhaps the world in order to save it for the few plutocrats who benefit from doing anything other than cutting their taxes.
4
The sad part is that Mr. Krugman is correct about the economic impact of GOP-run states' refusal to expand Medicaid. Kansas is but one example, where the only hospitals in some rural areas are closing because they can't afford to stay open without sufficient business, thanks to insufficient Medicaid traffic. So people have to travel much farther when they need health care or they simply do without.
6
ACA a success? I don't think so - I lost my health insurance twice - first when all sole proprietor policies were summarily dropped and now when Health Republic of NY went bankrupt after losing 77 millions dollars and wasting about that much in government subsidies to start up - all in the span of 2 years. If you call that a success, how do you define failure? As for the economic recovery, it's the slowest since the great depression with the lowest labor participation rate ever. I see ACA as part of the cause for this. And then there's the cost to all those who pay for health insurance who now are taxed to pay for the health insurance - poor and expensive as it is- of other people. Seems like a grand failure to me.
1
"As for the economic recovery, it's the slowest since the great depression with the lowest labor participation rate ever. ..."
You must be very, very frustrated with your new conservative friends in Congress because we are living the GOP economy. It didn't have to be this way but Republicans decided to obstruct every attempt to revitalize the economy they destroyed with failed conservative economic ideas over the last 30+ years. Oh, well.
"... I see ACA as part of the cause for this. "
Entirely ludicrous. Or maybe "new conservative" has some evidence that hasn't come to light that he hasn't shared with the world. Do you have any such evidece "new conservative?"
You must be very, very frustrated with your new conservative friends in Congress because we are living the GOP economy. It didn't have to be this way but Republicans decided to obstruct every attempt to revitalize the economy they destroyed with failed conservative economic ideas over the last 30+ years. Oh, well.
"... I see ACA as part of the cause for this. "
Entirely ludicrous. Or maybe "new conservative" has some evidence that hasn't come to light that he hasn't shared with the world. Do you have any such evidece "new conservative?"
"You have to wonder: Does Mr. Romney really think that his party would look more favorably on Obamacare if it worked even better than it has, if it cost no money at all? If so, he’s delusional. After all, the great majority of Republican-controlled states have turned down free money, refusing to let the federal government expand Medicaid (and in so doing pump money into their economies)." PK
Turning down the Medicaid money does not mean that people who would otherwise be covered stop getting any care at all. It simply means that "those people" are still clogging emergency rooms when they should be in a doctor's office. It means they are treated at later stages of their illnesses. And it means that everyone in my state who has insurance is still subsidizing those who don't. It costs us a whole lot of insurance and tax dollars to turn down that free money.
Republicans are real financial geniuses.
Turning down the Medicaid money does not mean that people who would otherwise be covered stop getting any care at all. It simply means that "those people" are still clogging emergency rooms when they should be in a doctor's office. It means they are treated at later stages of their illnesses. And it means that everyone in my state who has insurance is still subsidizing those who don't. It costs us a whole lot of insurance and tax dollars to turn down that free money.
Republicans are real financial geniuses.
10
There are many historic second acts in politics and in life. Ben Carson and Trump were both Democrats till they changed parties. And now they're neck and neck, both Hobson's Choices, in the always skewed Republican Presidential polls. It's too much to expect Mitt Romney to change parties at this late date, but one hopes he can see the light he missed in 2012. Shoulda, woulda, coulda run this year. If Richard Nixon could run three times for the Presidency and win twice, surely Romney could run twice and win once. Though I am not of his political suasion in any way, surely by now he has the nous, brilliance and savvy to win without talking about binders full of women, car elevators, $5,000 bets, and the like. He's older and wiser and no longer callow. He can claim the Affordable Care Act as his own creation, instead of cringing from that honour. No doubt the Republican party will come to its senses before Trump and Carson bedevil the caucus states. Run, Mitt, run!
2
The GOP has lost all sense of humanity. They have"wrapped themselves in a flag, and are carrying a cross" before them, while spewing hatred, contempt for women, the poor, and those who are in need of healthcare all under the pretense of love of country and Jesus. They have no solutions for any of the problems we are facing economically or otherwise. What they do want is to dismantle the modicum of healthcare the ACA provides, the dismantling of social safety nets, and a reset on women's and civil rights. They say no to rebuilding our infrastructure or improving our society, yes to war and greed. They have ice water in their veins and hatred in their heart except for the wealthy. We stand on the precipice of losing what progressive gains we have made in this nation if a Republican is elected President in 2016.
12
"They have"wrapped themselves in a flag, ..."
The flag they've wrapped themselves in is the Confederate flag.
The flag they've wrapped themselves in is the Confederate flag.
Had the Affordable Care Act been around just 2 years earlier, a friend of mine may be alive today. He was only 50 when he passed away. He knew he needed care for a heart condition but was unable to obtain insurance due to that preexisting condition. I am sure there have been many other loved ones that are now gone who face the same situation.
The Republicans have never offered any serious alternative, only obstruction. it is blatantly apparent that the Republicans and some Democrats only care about Insurance company campaign contributions.
The Republicans have never offered any serious alternative, only obstruction. it is blatantly apparent that the Republicans and some Democrats only care about Insurance company campaign contributions.
323
No, and they're too cheap (or ashamed) to propose what they REALLY want--genocide based on income level and possibly ethnicity and race, all at no cost to the "worthy."
This Final Solution to the American Constitution and its guarantees doesn't exist. The previous iteration in Nazi-occupied Europe had vast costs in staffing, transportation, fuel, and materiel--and may very well have speeded Allied victory because of an insane leadership.
Republicans may claim this is a "christian" nation, but today's GOP/TeaParty is hardly that. To say that the AIDS epidemic was "God's judgment" makes their claimed "religious belief" an obscenity that's the very opposite of Jesus's teachings.
This Final Solution to the American Constitution and its guarantees doesn't exist. The previous iteration in Nazi-occupied Europe had vast costs in staffing, transportation, fuel, and materiel--and may very well have speeded Allied victory because of an insane leadership.
Republicans may claim this is a "christian" nation, but today's GOP/TeaParty is hardly that. To say that the AIDS epidemic was "God's judgment" makes their claimed "religious belief" an obscenity that's the very opposite of Jesus's teachings.
"people supposedly hurt by Obamacare"
Hmm...this kind of oblivious and politically-motivated dismissal of facts is what mars your articles, Paul. Your own paper today is talking about 750,000 poor people who may be harmed by Obamacare because the law was constructed so ineptly, it will eliminate subsidies for people so poor they are not required to file tax returns—except for Obamacare demanding they do this to keep subsidies.
There are numerous instances of this law failing to deliver what it promises, or actually harming people it should be helping. The fact Obamacare is patterned on a Republican-constructed aid to the insurance companies should point to why it is such a bad idea anyway, in addition to how in the process of administering the plan, so many things have gone wrong.
Obama did not have the courage to back a simple, single-payer, system that would have helped the people most in need. Going to Mitt Romney to ask for help for the poor is just another sign of what the Obama's "compromise" really means in practice—hurting a lot of people to please others you should not be negotiating with in the first place.
Hmm...this kind of oblivious and politically-motivated dismissal of facts is what mars your articles, Paul. Your own paper today is talking about 750,000 poor people who may be harmed by Obamacare because the law was constructed so ineptly, it will eliminate subsidies for people so poor they are not required to file tax returns—except for Obamacare demanding they do this to keep subsidies.
There are numerous instances of this law failing to deliver what it promises, or actually harming people it should be helping. The fact Obamacare is patterned on a Republican-constructed aid to the insurance companies should point to why it is such a bad idea anyway, in addition to how in the process of administering the plan, so many things have gone wrong.
Obama did not have the courage to back a simple, single-payer, system that would have helped the people most in need. Going to Mitt Romney to ask for help for the poor is just another sign of what the Obama's "compromise" really means in practice—hurting a lot of people to please others you should not be negotiating with in the first place.
2
Compromise is the art of good government. Had Obama held out for a single payer plan the result would have been nothing. The Congress that passed the Affordable Care Act contained many who opposed healthcare reform as Republicans do today.
1
Obama didn't have the votes.
We got the system compromise with the GOP enabled, overall the cost of health care is down, there remains too many profit centers between consumer and provider, notably the insurance and pharma related industries - telling is the new trend illustrated by Turing Pharmaceuticals, CEO Martin Shkreli acquired the rights to Daraprim and increased its price by 500%..
My personal family policy has increased thousands per year, and my co-pays for an elective surgery increased from $800 to $3500 this past year, all with in-network facilities. Mr. Krugman is just wrong. What Obamacare has done has handed medicaid to more people- a free ride for the poor who overutilize services, paid for on the backs of middle class and upper class working Americans. This is not insurance- it is just another freebie given by the government.
3
That is certainly not the experience of many Americans. I pay the full tab here in CA for my Covered California policy. My deductible is much lower. My co-pays are reasonable. It's only going up by about 4% instead of the preposterous amounts it used to go up. And, to top it off, my insurance agent tells me that my network (a big problem for many the first year or more) is about to be expanded dramatically. Either NY has a lousy implementation of the ACA or you've chosen the wrong plan. You should complain to your state reps and governor to modify the NY plan, if that is what's needed. RomneyCare underwent about 6 legislative adjustments that made it work very well, due to cooperation between the Mass. legislature and governors. But, we don't have a cooperative federal legislature. So, no tweaks can be performed as needed. Who's fault is that? It's pretty obvious. We have a choice: it's either go single payer (I doubt you want that) or fix the insurance markets, as Chief Justice John Roberts said.
1
Evidence that the poor overutilize? I thought the problem was they underutilized.
If you were actually a surgeon, your medical coverage would be covered by the hospital that you work for or you would make enough money that you would be able to afford an increase in expense to cover those with no coverage. More likely you are a middle class worker who has some increases in your employer based coverage as lots of companies have been reducing benefits for cost saving reasons ... not really a fault of the ACA in my opinion.
1
When a party has to cut deals both ways with its factions in its own ranks and then issue general boilerplate that ignores hard demands and abrogation of powers by one or both parties (the Speaker and/or his Party Caucus), amid calls for formal adoption a political rule (the Haskert rule) that defeats and permanently cripple the House's constitutional. meta-party governing function, then leadership has no central path or stability--and no commitment to govern!
7
Mitt Romney is just another tone-deaf, insulated, clueless CEO type, whose "signature achievement" paved the way for us to see on a nationwide scale the flaws inherent in for-profit health care.
Instead of praising it, Nobel Laureate Krugman would better employhis expertise to point out exactly how the shortcomings of Obamacare inevitably result from requiring that corporate mindset to provide fair and adequate, instead of merely lucrative, service. Coverage of pre-existing conditions and preventive care were absent from earlier health policies for a reason. They contribute to health rather than the bottom line, and it's never been about that in our triple-oxymoronic "health care system."
Instead of praising it, Nobel Laureate Krugman would better employhis expertise to point out exactly how the shortcomings of Obamacare inevitably result from requiring that corporate mindset to provide fair and adequate, instead of merely lucrative, service. Coverage of pre-existing conditions and preventive care were absent from earlier health policies for a reason. They contribute to health rather than the bottom line, and it's never been about that in our triple-oxymoronic "health care system."
2
The ACA is a good start. It opened access to people who could not get insurance even if they could pay, and kept people from being punted from insurance because they needed to use it. For us, it makes getting laid off a serious financial setback rather than a death sentence. As Biden might almost say, it is a big deal.
But it has done nothing to reduce cost. Efficiencies from electronic records have not kicked in (how is it in this day and age, as we are busy developing AI that can be used to form diagnoses, that the medical industry can't automate anything other than billing with a reasonably good application?) The industry has done nothing to standardize and publish costs, let alone reduce them. The process is opaque.
We could do the other part - require the industry to actually provide the market data to make people aware of cost; pressure drug companies to reduce costs; set standards to assure that we are not over-using expensive procedures.
But the current house majority is not interested in that. They would prefer to go back to the point in which being a 50-something laid off worker, with 30 years of hard work behind you, is a death sentence. It is an interesting ideology.
But it has done nothing to reduce cost. Efficiencies from electronic records have not kicked in (how is it in this day and age, as we are busy developing AI that can be used to form diagnoses, that the medical industry can't automate anything other than billing with a reasonably good application?) The industry has done nothing to standardize and publish costs, let alone reduce them. The process is opaque.
We could do the other part - require the industry to actually provide the market data to make people aware of cost; pressure drug companies to reduce costs; set standards to assure that we are not over-using expensive procedures.
But the current house majority is not interested in that. They would prefer to go back to the point in which being a 50-something laid off worker, with 30 years of hard work behind you, is a death sentence. It is an interesting ideology.
4
The debate over the ACA shines a garish light on a deeply disturbing problem confronting this country. As several commenters have noted, many opponents of the ACA don't want the poor to have health insurance. That reflects a breakdown of community highlighted in Romney's infamous "47 percent" speech.
A democratic political system cannot function indefinitely in an environment in which the people living under it do not feel a positive connection to each other. The Tea party represents a faction of the American people who feel alienated from the values and political convictions of the rest. Otherwise, why would they elect members of congress and favor presidential candidates who exhibit such contempt for the government that represents the nation?
To one degree or another, virtually all the Republican candidates pander to this alienation and scorn for the federal government. Hillary Clinton does not share these attitudes, but her persona and behavior have nevertheless converted her into a polarizing figure. Still, in a time of pessimism about the country's future, this deeply flawed candidate remains the best hope for healing the country's divisions, something President Obama, for all his skills and intelligence, proved unable to do. The future welfare of this nation depends in part on her proving her critics wrong. In an ideal world, Sanders might play the role of uniter. But we are stuck with this world.
A democratic political system cannot function indefinitely in an environment in which the people living under it do not feel a positive connection to each other. The Tea party represents a faction of the American people who feel alienated from the values and political convictions of the rest. Otherwise, why would they elect members of congress and favor presidential candidates who exhibit such contempt for the government that represents the nation?
To one degree or another, virtually all the Republican candidates pander to this alienation and scorn for the federal government. Hillary Clinton does not share these attitudes, but her persona and behavior have nevertheless converted her into a polarizing figure. Still, in a time of pessimism about the country's future, this deeply flawed candidate remains the best hope for healing the country's divisions, something President Obama, for all his skills and intelligence, proved unable to do. The future welfare of this nation depends in part on her proving her critics wrong. In an ideal world, Sanders might play the role of uniter. But we are stuck with this world.
2
I like Senator Sanders but I don't think his label as a socialist will help him in the general election. I get what he is saying and agree with him- but the GOP would rather run against him than HRC- so for that, I believe HRC should be the nominee since she has a better chance than Bernie Sanders in the general election. I would be happy to vote for either of them- but we need to consolidate support for whoever the nominee is to ensure a GOP clown isn't in the White House to continue the Bush years.
1
Inclusive and helpful governance should be the first and foremost end game of American leadership. Instead a whole segment of the population is 180 degrees in the other direction and they are being courted (very successfully) by the Republican candidates.
One undeniable fact stands out over all: you can't lead or manage a country of 330 million people by shutting the door on those among them who need help.
How has this streak of cruelty and denial arisen and why is it being perpetuated? One of the best and clearly the most necessary cures will be to scrub Congress of its radical element and that is possible only when the Democrats solidify and vote. A tough challenge but we are closing in on do or die.
One undeniable fact stands out over all: you can't lead or manage a country of 330 million people by shutting the door on those among them who need help.
How has this streak of cruelty and denial arisen and why is it being perpetuated? One of the best and clearly the most necessary cures will be to scrub Congress of its radical element and that is possible only when the Democrats solidify and vote. A tough challenge but we are closing in on do or die.
5
Medicare for all is the best solution.
Realistically, however, the commercial health insurance industry is simply not going to disappear. The need to protect the commercial health insurance industry is why ACA is as complicated as it is. With Medicare for all, the health insurance industry would still be there to provide the supplemental policies that are necessary for anyone insured by Medicare. The cost of these policies is relatively low, even for current Medicare insureds, who are in generally worse health than the entire population.
Realistically, however, the commercial health insurance industry is simply not going to disappear. The need to protect the commercial health insurance industry is why ACA is as complicated as it is. With Medicare for all, the health insurance industry would still be there to provide the supplemental policies that are necessary for anyone insured by Medicare. The cost of these policies is relatively low, even for current Medicare insureds, who are in generally worse health than the entire population.
2
Krugman, of course, is correct but this editorial will only reach the ears of non-republicans. Romney is a case in point of how the new extremism from the Right has hijacked once intelligent and pragmatic politicians. ANY government program that is successful will be target # 1 for republicans as they seek to self fulfill their own prophecy that all government is bad and intrinsically evil. In fact extreme incompetency in government is now a plus on the resume of any potential republican candidate for any office. If the democrats could not take the signature republican plan for universal insurance and present it as an alternative to single payer without the right calling it socialism then don't expect them to embrace any program no matter how functional and necessary or cost saving. One can only imagine the contortions going on in the mind of Mitt Romney to keep his career and status relevant in today's Republican Party.
2
Prof. Krugman writes: "But now it’s 2015 in America, and Mr. Romney’s party doesn’t want people who get things done. On the contrary, it actively hates government programs that improve American lives, especially if they help Those People."
I think the problem is broader yet: The current Republican party wants the government to do nothing that doesn't transfer money from the poor and the middle class to the rich. This isn't racism, exactly, but it has racist impact. Anything that might cost a rich or even middle class person a dollar is evil. Any action or any program that might show the government as an entity worth supporting is evil, with the exception of the military, which channels vast sums to a handful of wealthy industrialists. That's the entire raison d'être of Paul Ryan's Republican Party: to take money form those who have not so much, and give it to the 1%. Those without vast means who support this Republican Party are simply deluded: by racism, by dreams of vast wealth, and by a belief that they are good, hardworking folks while Those People are simply shiftless, lazy and no good. This liberal would welcome the return of a genuine, opposition Conservative Party, if that group would accept that government and taxes are necessary to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This Republican Party doesn't believe that. It's the Anarchist Lite Party. The sooner it dies, the better.
I think the problem is broader yet: The current Republican party wants the government to do nothing that doesn't transfer money from the poor and the middle class to the rich. This isn't racism, exactly, but it has racist impact. Anything that might cost a rich or even middle class person a dollar is evil. Any action or any program that might show the government as an entity worth supporting is evil, with the exception of the military, which channels vast sums to a handful of wealthy industrialists. That's the entire raison d'être of Paul Ryan's Republican Party: to take money form those who have not so much, and give it to the 1%. Those without vast means who support this Republican Party are simply deluded: by racism, by dreams of vast wealth, and by a belief that they are good, hardworking folks while Those People are simply shiftless, lazy and no good. This liberal would welcome the return of a genuine, opposition Conservative Party, if that group would accept that government and taxes are necessary to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This Republican Party doesn't believe that. It's the Anarchist Lite Party. The sooner it dies, the better.
7
Professor Krugman is absolutely right to note how even members of the upper middle class benefit from the ACA. You don't need to actually use it to appreciate the protection it provides against the possibility that employer-provided health insurance may be lost at any time. People whose material success has been sufficient to insulate them from most of life's vicissitudes could still be wiped out by the cost of a serious injury to a young adult child not yet embarked on an insurance-bearing career or by a job loss followed by grave illness. For some it opens up the opportunity for a glide path to retirement, making part-time, volunteer, or consulting work possible without prohibitive medical risk. Blind partisanship prevents many of the fortunate from recognizing that they too have a stake in the ACA.
6
"The point is that from the point of view of the Republican base, covering the uninsured, or helping the unlucky in general, isn’t a feature, it’s a bug. It’s not about how much it costs in taxpayer funds or economic impact: the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering."
Well said. And having read Jeb Bush's convoluted proposal to replace the ACA, I can say the above statement is 100% true. His plan would almost return health insurance back to where it was, a Darwinian survival of the richest. Sure, there are lots of poorly explained financial tricks like "savings accounts' etc., but in the end it is guaranteed to ensure that insurance companies will prosper as never before, and more people will forfeit needed preventive care.
I find it sad we continue to fight over healthcare as if the need for medical services were a godforsaken waste. Those with excellent plans--Congress, in particular--are more interested in denying the same to average Americans in order to use the savings for other programs they favor more--like military spending and tax breaks for the wealthy.
I'm less concerned how Romney thinks these days than the average American who seem so easily duped by claims not supported by data. Our nation's problems would be more readily solved in the US public had numerical literacy, and a general ability to separate political fact from fiction.
Well said. And having read Jeb Bush's convoluted proposal to replace the ACA, I can say the above statement is 100% true. His plan would almost return health insurance back to where it was, a Darwinian survival of the richest. Sure, there are lots of poorly explained financial tricks like "savings accounts' etc., but in the end it is guaranteed to ensure that insurance companies will prosper as never before, and more people will forfeit needed preventive care.
I find it sad we continue to fight over healthcare as if the need for medical services were a godforsaken waste. Those with excellent plans--Congress, in particular--are more interested in denying the same to average Americans in order to use the savings for other programs they favor more--like military spending and tax breaks for the wealthy.
I'm less concerned how Romney thinks these days than the average American who seem so easily duped by claims not supported by data. Our nation's problems would be more readily solved in the US public had numerical literacy, and a general ability to separate political fact from fiction.
13
I think I should point out, Christine, that the insurers are prospering now since the ACA was implemented.
"[O]ne big industry group that owes a huge debt of gratitude to President Obama: health insurers. UnitedHealth (UNH) reported earnings that topped forecasts Wednesday morning and its stock rose 3% to a new all-time high as a result.
Simply put, greater access to health insurance has led to more customers for the insurance giants. And UnitedHealth is not the only company to benefit.
The other four members of the so-called Big Five health insurers -- Aetna (AET), Cigna (CI), Humana (HUM), and Anthem (ANTM) (formerly WellPoint) -- have all beaten the S&P 500 over the past five years or so as well.
Shares of the big hospital owners have done extremely well lately too. HCA (HCA), Universal Health Services (UHS) and Community Health Systems (CYH) all had banner years in 2014."
http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/21/investing/unitedhealth-earnings-obamacare/
The ACA isn't the only reason for the improved profitability of health insurers, but it is certainly one reason. One thing these results show is that Obamacare has not just encouraged the sickest and least healthy citizens to sign up. It has attracted many healthy people, especially the young, too. If Obamacare had suffered from the problem of "adverse selection," then expanding the roles would have made insurance less profitable, not more. So in that sense higher profits indicate the ACA is working as expected.
"[O]ne big industry group that owes a huge debt of gratitude to President Obama: health insurers. UnitedHealth (UNH) reported earnings that topped forecasts Wednesday morning and its stock rose 3% to a new all-time high as a result.
Simply put, greater access to health insurance has led to more customers for the insurance giants. And UnitedHealth is not the only company to benefit.
The other four members of the so-called Big Five health insurers -- Aetna (AET), Cigna (CI), Humana (HUM), and Anthem (ANTM) (formerly WellPoint) -- have all beaten the S&P 500 over the past five years or so as well.
Shares of the big hospital owners have done extremely well lately too. HCA (HCA), Universal Health Services (UHS) and Community Health Systems (CYH) all had banner years in 2014."
http://money.cnn.com/2015/01/21/investing/unitedhealth-earnings-obamacare/
The ACA isn't the only reason for the improved profitability of health insurers, but it is certainly one reason. One thing these results show is that Obamacare has not just encouraged the sickest and least healthy citizens to sign up. It has attracted many healthy people, especially the young, too. If Obamacare had suffered from the problem of "adverse selection," then expanding the roles would have made insurance less profitable, not more. So in that sense higher profits indicate the ACA is working as expected.
It is no wonder the GOP likes to slash funding for education... if people were well educated or at least had critical thinking skills which you don't need an advanced degree for- they would not be voting against their own self interest for the GOP clowns.
1
The Republican Party has jumped the shark and left reality-based politics a long time ago. It has become a faith-based cult, where knowledge and competence are disregarded. All that matters is devotion to the cult of movement conservatism and how strong one's faith in it is.
According to GOP myth, Ronald Reagan single-handedly slew the Red Menace and tore down the Berlin Wall with his bare hands. His declaration that government is the problem, not the solution to our problems is one of the most important tenets of the cult - and they've cast government in the role of Greatest Threat to Freedom to replace the Soviet "Evil Empire". Without a great threat to keep their followers in line, they've got nothing - and they've cast liberals and Democrats in the role of Big Government Terrorists.
Which is why a Republican serving in public office who actually tries to make it work and solve problems via government is considered a collaborator at best and a traitor at worst. That's why outsider demagogues like Trump and Carson are doing so well with the base. It's why Senator Ted Cruz is playing the role of bomb-thrower in Congress.
Until the U.S. Government falls, true believers are still looking for that final victory like they had over Russia - and they truly believe it's a matter of life and death.
According to GOP myth, Ronald Reagan single-handedly slew the Red Menace and tore down the Berlin Wall with his bare hands. His declaration that government is the problem, not the solution to our problems is one of the most important tenets of the cult - and they've cast government in the role of Greatest Threat to Freedom to replace the Soviet "Evil Empire". Without a great threat to keep their followers in line, they've got nothing - and they've cast liberals and Democrats in the role of Big Government Terrorists.
Which is why a Republican serving in public office who actually tries to make it work and solve problems via government is considered a collaborator at best and a traitor at worst. That's why outsider demagogues like Trump and Carson are doing so well with the base. It's why Senator Ted Cruz is playing the role of bomb-thrower in Congress.
Until the U.S. Government falls, true believers are still looking for that final victory like they had over Russia - and they truly believe it's a matter of life and death.
9
As much as medical treatment has advanced in modern times, it seems that the use of leeches has continued to grow. Now, however, the leeches are the insurance companies, who add unnecessary layers of expense to medical treatment in this country. What do the insurance companies contribute? Well, they keep lots of expensive lobbyists employed and pay multi-million-dollar salaries to their executives, and they generously grease the palms of politicians at all levels, while making it more difficult and expensive for the average American to receive adequate care. It is shameful that the great, rich USA is so far behind most other modern countries in keeping all its citizens healthy.
7
Krugman needs to explain why medical care costs in this country have increased over 800% since the mid 1960s ? When was the last time that government involvement in any industry has increased efficiency? Krugman notes that states are turing down "free money". This is the typical liberal mind set that as long as the government is giving away somebody else's money, it must be "free". I seriously doubt that Obamacare when examined carefully has resulted in better medical care for anybody, because having insurance does not equal having medical care. It turns out it is a meaningless statistic especially when a closer look shows tax exemptions for union cadillac health programs etc. because they vote for Democrats.
2
Government involvement in health care in virtually all other advanced countries has resulted in better care at half the cost. The argument that the "free market" gives the best result in healthcare has been thoroughly disproven.
The shortcomings of Obamacare arise from the concessions to the insurance and healthcare industries that were considered necessary to get the bill passed.
The shortcomings of Obamacare arise from the concessions to the insurance and healthcare industries that were considered necessary to get the bill passed.
6
The free market has worked. It failed as soon as medicare came in to play. Medicare pays for everything. Free market is gone. There is no disincentive to overusing care from the patient or physician perspective. If patients had to pay something, anything, maybe some free market forces will come back and reign in costs.
You are 100% correct. Any thinking person would have preferred a single payer healthcare system but that would have been impossible to pass with all the insurance companies and their lobbies in DC. This was the best Obama could do at the time with the GOP controlled House. Hopefully, we will be able to get this done in future but we needed to take baby steps first- and even with this baby step, they have tried to repeal it 50 times. In the end, universal healthcare will be cheaper than the hodge podge system we have now but at least with ACA, the healthcare cost increases have slowed down.
1
For Mitt, he made a choice some time ago to be associated with the nut groups. For many, however, they don't have such choices. The policies, or non-policies, favored by the Republicans are not only bad for the poor, but bad for the nation.
They no longer pretend to be a party with a Conservative goal. They are now the party proving that government is unworkable, and the best way to do that is to make people disbelieve in government, except for the sole purpose of waging war. They will win elections not by winning the battle of ideas, but making sure people are turned off.
The media loves to play to that narrative by giving equal coverage to idiotic ideas. Covering the Republican Presidential candidates isn't that much different than covering the psychiatric ward full of delusional psychopaths. Ratings are driven by who can tell the biggest lie and who can lob the most offensive insult.
What the NY Times doesn't realize, is that it is no different than Fox News when it gives equal time to idiots. We laugh about Romney. We shouldn't be laughing about him. There is nothing funny to see the beginning of the end of a democratic process. It ends not by government suppressing the press, but by the press becoming an extension of the clown show.
They no longer pretend to be a party with a Conservative goal. They are now the party proving that government is unworkable, and the best way to do that is to make people disbelieve in government, except for the sole purpose of waging war. They will win elections not by winning the battle of ideas, but making sure people are turned off.
The media loves to play to that narrative by giving equal coverage to idiotic ideas. Covering the Republican Presidential candidates isn't that much different than covering the psychiatric ward full of delusional psychopaths. Ratings are driven by who can tell the biggest lie and who can lob the most offensive insult.
What the NY Times doesn't realize, is that it is no different than Fox News when it gives equal time to idiots. We laugh about Romney. We shouldn't be laughing about him. There is nothing funny to see the beginning of the end of a democratic process. It ends not by government suppressing the press, but by the press becoming an extension of the clown show.
2
I get your frustration about the mainstream media giving equal time to all the nut jobs in the GOP. Having said that, we need to know what is going on with these people and not put our heads in the sand. What we really need is media to challenge and expose these morons for the dangerous, unworkable Ayn Rand policies they espouse- not ignore them. That is how fascism gets started- when good people do nothing. We need to be aware of what they're doing so we can stop them - with our votes.
1
What we hate about ACA is the republican bits. I would add to that that some administrative work is done in red state areas known for opacity and, well, corruption. The customer service model corporations have been using for years to deny customers service ACA uses is a seminal example. Other unnecessary obstacles abound.
Having to prove one's income for the subsidy causing thousands to have to pay double or more than what they were quoted when signing up when the student loan/aid FASA application is being simplified by pulling data from tax filings is one example. Workers most likely to have non-reporting employers not wanting their treatment of employees tracked make documentation difficult, especially for those not having a computer or internet.
These copies are sent to a center in Kentucky, that although opted in, is, well, McConnell says it all right? The center that processes income proof in KY habitually loses documents. I would not understand this except at a survival job in the insurance industry was a contractor to major insurance brands hired to document they "tried" to process claims when multiple faxes not just from stranded homeless Sandy victims but from major banks. FedEx'd oritinal auto title paperwork was never received--by the thousands! I only recognize it in the KY processing center from that job.
Also provider networks not accepting medicare create a two tier system, one good and the other for the poor.
Need I go on?
Having to prove one's income for the subsidy causing thousands to have to pay double or more than what they were quoted when signing up when the student loan/aid FASA application is being simplified by pulling data from tax filings is one example. Workers most likely to have non-reporting employers not wanting their treatment of employees tracked make documentation difficult, especially for those not having a computer or internet.
These copies are sent to a center in Kentucky, that although opted in, is, well, McConnell says it all right? The center that processes income proof in KY habitually loses documents. I would not understand this except at a survival job in the insurance industry was a contractor to major insurance brands hired to document they "tried" to process claims when multiple faxes not just from stranded homeless Sandy victims but from major banks. FedEx'd oritinal auto title paperwork was never received--by the thousands! I only recognize it in the KY processing center from that job.
Also provider networks not accepting medicare create a two tier system, one good and the other for the poor.
Need I go on?
Perhaps technocrats from both parties can collaborate on improving the Affordable Care Act. Paying 2005 more for a premium that includes coverage I don't want is not my idea of healthcare I can get excited about. I'm happy that millions more have coverage. I'm less thrilled with the costs and limitations that achieving that benchmark has apparently placed on many others. Give me government mandated catastrophic coverage and everything else is individual add-on at the individual's expense, subsidies provided for those who can't afford additional basic coverage.
2
I agree that both parties should work to improve Health Care Reform but as Mr. Krugman states, the GOP has no desire to see Health Care Reform work, quit the opposite, they want to destroy it. Remember the 50-60 meaningless House votes to destroy "Obamacare"?. It will take the GOP to jettison their right-wing fanatics before even a discussion about how to improve reform can even start.
The problem with Obamacare is that it is the result of a Republican scorched earth policy that wanted no change in the old system and refused to promote a realistic alternate that would actually provide affordable healthcare. So instead of a single payer plan or an intelligent industry-government solution as in other developed nations we get a patched up multi-payer plan that is mostly run by the government.
The Republicans have been and still are the party of NO!!!. They are truly engaged in eliminating all benefits of government for all but a handful of the most wealthy who need the government only for security - hence the emphasis on crime and 'defense" in the G.O.P.
Until people stop responding to these Pavlovian, consultant designed security and religious issues and understand how poorly this party is treating them we will continue to lose more and more.
The Republicans have been and still are the party of NO!!!. They are truly engaged in eliminating all benefits of government for all but a handful of the most wealthy who need the government only for security - hence the emphasis on crime and 'defense" in the G.O.P.
Until people stop responding to these Pavlovian, consultant designed security and religious issues and understand how poorly this party is treating them we will continue to lose more and more.
8
For a lot of people, myself included, Obamacare is just too expensive to be affordable at all. At many hundreds of dollars a month, with a deductible of several thousand dollars, plus all manner of limits of coverage built into it, the so-called "Bronze Option" -- the "cheapest" available -- was out of the question for me.
So I remain uninsured. And I am now minus the cost of the fine I paid for not buying into this unaffordable deal.
Meantime, the insurance giants continue to laugh all the way to the bank as they enjoy collecting the premiums of millions of Americans who got arm-twisted into joining this expensive plan.
Why the celebration? Why the song of "well, it sure is better than nothing"? President Obama gave up without a real fight the public (insurance) option. He made nice with the unregulated private insurance giants who no doubt contributed generously to his political campaign.
This problem is not over. Too many people remain who have insufficient money and opportuniy to be able to buy such high-priced medical insurance.
Financial insufficiency on the part of so many working class Americans today is NOT because we lack the right "values" either. It's more basic: we don't make family-supporting wages on the jobs we can get to be able to afford such costly insurance.
oz.
So I remain uninsured. And I am now minus the cost of the fine I paid for not buying into this unaffordable deal.
Meantime, the insurance giants continue to laugh all the way to the bank as they enjoy collecting the premiums of millions of Americans who got arm-twisted into joining this expensive plan.
Why the celebration? Why the song of "well, it sure is better than nothing"? President Obama gave up without a real fight the public (insurance) option. He made nice with the unregulated private insurance giants who no doubt contributed generously to his political campaign.
This problem is not over. Too many people remain who have insufficient money and opportuniy to be able to buy such high-priced medical insurance.
Financial insufficiency on the part of so many working class Americans today is NOT because we lack the right "values" either. It's more basic: we don't make family-supporting wages on the jobs we can get to be able to afford such costly insurance.
oz.
11
It is not only that "the base is actually willing to lose money in order to perpetuate suffering [of Those People]".
The base (was ever a group more aptly named?) is also willing to shut down the Import-Export Bank, which actually turns a profit, because it's welfare for Those Corporations.
The plutocrats and demagogues have convinced the canaille that government is evil. Reduce government to some unspecified minimum and all their fears, uncertainties, and doubts will magically disappear. Such is the mythology.
The base (was ever a group more aptly named?) is also willing to shut down the Import-Export Bank, which actually turns a profit, because it's welfare for Those Corporations.
The plutocrats and demagogues have convinced the canaille that government is evil. Reduce government to some unspecified minimum and all their fears, uncertainties, and doubts will magically disappear. Such is the mythology.
5
Obamacare is not the ideal solution of healthcare of a nation - it is a compromise solution to protect the business interest - Insurence and drug companies. Why in Obamacare we are not able to curtail the power of drug companies - drugs those are available in Canda at very low price, we are paying multiple times the price? Why the Insurence business is not removed by a single payer system like Medicare? It is the compromise between politicians and business to support each other interests. We have to free up this limitations and get a truly effective healthcare system. No one in the election cycle is talking about it. This changes will free up large amount of money from healthcare inefficiency and that can be used to support education and childcare.
8
Please explain how single-payer will save money (other than administrative) in the current climate? Patients want every test under the sun, they will not change their lifestyles, do not want to pay for it, and nobody wants to pass up or limit their right to win the lottery (ie sue doctors).
Single-payer will not work until we limit care.
Single-payer will not work until we limit care.
Wait, one person in the election cycle IS talking about it--Bernie Sanders. Bernie has repeatedly spoken up for single payer--not to mention free or low cost higher education and childcare. Too bad the NYT editorial staff has seen fit to marginalize his campaign at every turn.
Mitt will do anything to win approval, although in doing so he reveals his inability to defend the truth of even his own success in health care reform. Maybe all of the rejection he suffered as religious missionary has propelled him into a life chasing the extrinsic values of wealth, power and praise. In Massachusetts, where I live, after being "approved" as Governor, he governed closer to the intrinsic values of "truth, honesty and the pursuit of justice" and did get some good things done. Then the siren call of the presidency once again set him in a mad pursuit for the ultimate social approval one could imagine. He lost because he couldn't hide his duplicity. He didn't know that the ultimate con men have deadened their inner lives so completely they appear authentic to the public because they are viewed as believing what they say. True leadership is obtained when the inner and social selves are in balance, but with the former leading the latter.
3
I work in the pharmaceutical business and have a pretty good understanding of the costs associated with new medications and without insurance we will have less development of new drugs. I believe that development of new drugs is important and will have a great impact on people's lives but to do this will cost money that would be difficult for people to pay out of their pocket. As I look at other areas of healthcare I see the same thing. Great things are happening but they are expensive. I do believe that an Obama care like program is needed. Friends of mine who have small business (10 employees or less) really hate Obama care because for the price their workers went up dramatically so they dropped the coverage and their employees went on the Obama care plans which cost them more and had less benefits than they had in the past. Now their employees are mad becasue they feel cheated and they sort of blame my friends and the whole thing is a big ball of wax. When people say that they are against Obama care they are not just being spiteful they may have runinto a situation where the change was negative for them.
1
I'm afraid Mr. Krugman needs to get his hands on some different statistics. A couple of years ago, my health insurance was around $450 a month. Last year it rose to $573. Next year it will rise to $916, a 60% increase. My friend's Medicare Advantage will go up next year by 52% to $700 for a married couple on Social Security.
This essay is one week premature. On Nov. 1, we will all see the real numbers for next year. Perhaps big business wont have large rate increases, but individuals are getting hammered. As usual, the medical industry preys upon the weakest. I will be very fortunate next week to find an Obamacare policy for less than $500 and that will require a $5000 deductible. A price closer to $600 may be waiting for me. The law gives them the advantage as I have to buy what the law prescribes. I can't afford that prescription.
This essay is one week premature. On Nov. 1, we will all see the real numbers for next year. Perhaps big business wont have large rate increases, but individuals are getting hammered. As usual, the medical industry preys upon the weakest. I will be very fortunate next week to find an Obamacare policy for less than $500 and that will require a $5000 deductible. A price closer to $600 may be waiting for me. The law gives them the advantage as I have to buy what the law prescribes. I can't afford that prescription.
4
Bruce's comment resonates with a number of people that I've spoken with over the past year. They focus in on how the health insurance and health care costs for themselves and those around them are impacted. To them, higher health insurance premiums, co-insurance/deductibles and access to their usual health care providers are their "touch point" for whether Obamacare is working or not as true health care reform. Knowing that people commonly evaluate government policy and elected officials based on how it affects them personally, and that health care represents both a major financial burden and impacts a highly personal aspect of their lives, this perception is neither surprising nor incorrect. What is missing is the other side of the equation - the things that have improved for many others. Access to guaranteed health insurance for those with pre-existing medical conditions. Extended coverage for children up to age 26. Community rating which spares those who through being unlucky or or with genetic predispositions have costly medical conditions from being priced out of the health insurance market, or being bankrupted when their health care costs exceed the now-outlawed maximum coverage limits. Subsidies and expanded Medicaid access for low income individuals to give them access to affordable health insurance coverage.
The silence of this latter group of beneficiaries is what is subjecting Obamacare to the public perception that it is a failed program.
The silence of this latter group of beneficiaries is what is subjecting Obamacare to the public perception that it is a failed program.
1
Help get single payer.
Sorry, Bruce, I am a Medicare recipient, and nothing remotely like what you describe is happening to our premiums.
I recently closed both of my podiatry offices, Boston and Lynn, MA after 36 years, as I can no longer afford the increasing costs (rent, malpractice insurance, electronic health record programs, supplies, etc.) of maintaining a solo private practice as insurance reimbursements fall, stagnate, or increase by 0.1% annually. A staunch supporter of universal health care, or Medicare for all as Senator Sanders has been promoting it, I have been crushed by the deliberate piecemeal implementation of the ACA perpetrated by the criminals in Congress. These untouchable gerrymandered Congresspeople sit in their nice offices in Washington dictating to healthcare providers as well as recipients what will and will not be paid for based on economic algorithms that have no connection with any sort of universe that real people live in. Is the electorate really as ignorant as Trump and Carson believe? Do people really not know that Medicare, with all its' limitations and faults, operates at a 3-5% overhead while most commercial insurers, an unfortunately shrinking group of giant conglomerates, operate at 17-25% overhead?
When Aetna and US Healthcare merged many years ago, the CEO of US Healthcare was given a bonus, for negotiating the merger deal, of $986 MILLION dollars. Where were the subscribers of these "non-profit" corporations who paid that fee? Health insurance companies must be eliminated entirely if true control of health care costs is to be attained.
When Aetna and US Healthcare merged many years ago, the CEO of US Healthcare was given a bonus, for negotiating the merger deal, of $986 MILLION dollars. Where were the subscribers of these "non-profit" corporations who paid that fee? Health insurance companies must be eliminated entirely if true control of health care costs is to be attained.
53
As Krugman so aptly points out, Romney is delusional, but that represents the Republican party. They are delusional to think they can win a general election when the electorate's majority comprises people they scorn: the poor, Hispanics, African-Americans, feminists, gays, etc. We are a multicultural nation that expects to be led by tolerant, supportive people, not arrogant, self-serving royalty.
12
Employers may not be cutting hours to avoid health care, they are, however, changing the offerings. The new offerings are generally "HSA" compatible, otherwise known as "monstrous deductible" policies. Employers now have excuses for huge shifts of health care costs to the employees. (That doesn't completely counteract the benefits of Obamacare, but it is an effect of Obamacare. We need single payer...)
12
Does either political party make a difference to Americans? Here is a statistic that represents the answer. When you take the percentage of the popular vote for each presidential winner multiplied by the percentage of the eligible voting age population, the winners of the presidential contests hardly command popular mandates.
1976...Jimmy Carter............D.....26.80%
1980...Ronald Reagan.........R.....26.70%
1984...Ronald Reagan.........R.....31.30%
1988...George H.W. Bush....R.....26.80%
1992...Bill Clinton................D.....23.80%
1996...Bill Clinton................D.....24.10%
2000...George W. Bush........R.....24.50%
2004...George W. Bush........R.....28.80%
2008...Barack Obama...........D.....30.80%
2012...Barack Obama...........D.....28.00%
1976...Jimmy Carter............D.....26.80%
1980...Ronald Reagan.........R.....26.70%
1984...Ronald Reagan.........R.....31.30%
1988...George H.W. Bush....R.....26.80%
1992...Bill Clinton................D.....23.80%
1996...Bill Clinton................D.....24.10%
2000...George W. Bush........R.....24.50%
2004...George W. Bush........R.....28.80%
2008...Barack Obama...........D.....30.80%
2012...Barack Obama...........D.....28.00%
10
That is a sad comment on US voter participation, not on the parties. Those who don't vote have no right to complain on who got elected. To improve voter participation voting should be obligatory like it is in many other countries, voting should be easy and election day a holiday so people have no excuse to stay away. The ballot should offer the choice none of the above. If none of the above wins the parties will have to respond by picking somebody else to run.
5
There are a couple of answers to these misleading statistics. 1) A significant percentage of people are blocked form voting. That's going up. 2) There's no reason to think that the non-voters would split very differently from the voters. A lot of the non-voters trust the voters to vote for them. Democracy doesn't require a mandate (which usually leads to trouble); it requires representation of everyone's interests and to the extent that the demography of the non-voters isn't very different over time from the demography of the voters, their interests will be represented.
I believe that the voters skew conservative compared to the eligible population, so I am not just being pollyannish about this. I wish everyone who could vote would. I just think that the demonstrable difference Obamacare makes to millions of people, as well as the demonstrable difference that GOP adventurism has made to millions of people, might be more important than the statistics you list here when it comes to your question whether "either political party makes a difference to Americans."
I believe that the voters skew conservative compared to the eligible population, so I am not just being pollyannish about this. I wish everyone who could vote would. I just think that the demonstrable difference Obamacare makes to millions of people, as well as the demonstrable difference that GOP adventurism has made to millions of people, might be more important than the statistics you list here when it comes to your question whether "either political party makes a difference to Americans."
This is a silly point. Really silly.
Democracy has no choice but to listen to people who voice their preferences. If people don't vote, they deny themselves a voice. This fact is obvious and offers zero commentary on the parties.
Democracy has no choice but to listen to people who voice their preferences. If people don't vote, they deny themselves a voice. This fact is obvious and offers zero commentary on the parties.
1
Obamacare is a success in that it successfully transfers wealth from people who earn it to people who don't. Since that has been the primary goal of Leftists like Krugman, he cheers it and as a courtier proclaims how wonderful it is. Unfortunately, the Right's primary goal is also to transfer wealth from people who earn it to people who don't - Medicare Part D was GWB's signature wealth redistribution, passed with Republican blessing.
So long as government provides something for nothing to people who don't deserve it, every government program is a success.
So long as government provides something for nothing to people who don't deserve it, every government program is a success.
5
The natural conclusion of your argument is that everything should be private and paid for by those who can afford it. What a cold, ugly world it would be. For my part, I don't mind pitching in to pay for things like fire fighters, police officers and health care. And I'm always grateful when I don't need them. By definition taxes are redistribution of wealth.
57
The Interstate Highway system is a success in that it successfully transfers wealth from people who earn it to people who don't.
See how that works?
See how that works?
34
The wealth has already been redistributed. Over the last 35 years, since Reagan, the effect of 'trickle-down' economics has been a flood upwards of money to the top 0.01%. So, I want my country back too! I want us to return to the successful distribution of wealth we had in the 50s and 60s when we were the envy of the rest of the world. Now, the distribution is very similar to what it was at the end of the robber baron era. That's not fair, and it's not sustainable. Moreover, it's not good economics either. Total wealth would be much greater with a more reasonable distribution. Returning to such a distribution is FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE! A large successful middle class IS the economic engine of this country. And, it's not all about soaking the rich as individuals. As Bill Gates said, big companies used to pay about 4% of their profit as taxes. Now, they pay about 2%. It's not the tax rates, per se, that are the issue. It's the absurd tax code that drives these companies to hold huge assets overseas instead of right here, where we need it. Give companies incentives to stay here. Repatriate the cash with incentives that would make it economically sensible for them to do so. And make sure they pay their fair share. Then, there'd be plenty of money for infrastructure and everything else we need. And we might be able to pave the streets in gold, or at least pave the darn streets.
41
Perhaps the states' reluctant to sign up for 'free money" provided by Obamacare's federal assistance are wary because they know something about the history of federal promises? Federal largesse was going to provide mentql health services for those put on the streets by the decision to shut down institutions: we all know how the homeless situation developed from this decisions. And federal largesse was going to underwrite the costs of special education demanded by federal statute. The fastest growing line item in local government budgets today is the cost of special ed--reflecting the feds' "overlooking" the obligation to fund that they promised. "Fool me once...."
3
Most of the states which are reluctant to sign up for the "free money" available through Obamacare are more than happy to sign up for "free money" when it comes in the form of agricultural, oil and coal subsidies, or other "goodies" that their politicians like, to the point where they are net takers of Federal money!
1
Your argument tells everyone to stop voting for republicans who get elected, underfund everything and then blame the failure of the programs to do what was promised to end the programs.
2
JPE, before you die of shock that the government didn't keep its promise to provide care for the mentally ill please remember who did the promising: Reagan.
He also raised taxes. Gasp!
He also raised taxes. Gasp!
3
Mitt Romney gladly, willingly, cynically ran a Presidential campaign of transparent, manufactured lies because American conservatives demand that they be told lies to fit the lies they've been told for two plus generations. That's what he deserves to be remembered for, and it's all he deserves to be remembered for. He's nothing but a man who, when given the chance, looked America in the eyed and lied through his teeth.
95
Maybe he has repented.
ouch!
There is no redemption for lying of that quantity. It's not like America can't find somebody other than Mitt Romney. Behavior like his campaign disqualifies him from further consideration.
Romney may be the one eyed man in the GOP land of the blind, but it's current leader in the polls is Ben Carson, who proudly wants to end Medicare and Social Security. It's exactly what America doesn't need: a sick and poor permanent underclass.
43
White people who cannot respect non-whites as their basic equals have always championed having low-paid slaves. It's so sick -- and it's just getting worse. Glad I got to see America try to be a fairer society for a few decades before the bored wealthy who don't need to work full-time anymore took over most political jobs. Jay Leno was right -- in many (but not all cases), "Politics is showbiz for ugly people."
the most notable thing about Paul Krugman is that ignorance never keeps him from certainty. The ACA "wonderful thing" has increased the % insured by all of 3% of the population. But it has damaged the fabric of delivery of health services for all, probably irreperably. Much of this damage is due to the lunacy of mandating EHRs that are profoundly dysfunctional, as documented in Lisa rosenbaum's piece in the 10/22 New England Journal of Medicine and references she cites. For many, the back of an Md's or RN's head is all they ever see during an outpatient or inpatient visit. Much of the additional damage has been due to the cyclone of reimbursement changes for health services set in motion which in turn has led to mass migrations of physicians into hospital and, now, insurance company employment and creation of very restricted insurer networks. Great work in setting the record straight Paul!
6
I am sure EHR's are a serious issue. But how central are they to the idea of health care for all? I would say that if more people are living than otherwise would because of Obamacare, that's a success, especially if the cost per life saved is going down. But maybe you disagree.
Hmmm sounds like Sour Grapes to me. Let me guess--you're a Doc who's had his wings clipped by the ACA
1
If you have to write a bunch of lies and half-truths to convince yourself you've been right all along, you're probably doing something wrong.
"'Without Romneycare, we wouldn’t have had Obamacare' and ...'a lot of people wouldn’t have health insurance'!" A Kevin McCarthy moment!
Mitt Romney may not be the nicest man but he's nice enough. I do admire his charitable giving without which he could be a lot richer.
Mitt could leave his party saying what R Reagan said, "Democratic Party left me." He could say his party is too Obstructionist, and that he would welcome an open convention & would be delighted if he were to be drafted.
For a change, Mitt, be honest. Don't be a salesman. You are a good man. Who doesn't have faults? We would disregard the car elevators; forgive you for picking Paul Ryan in 2012.
You should again say a few good things about ACA, that if elected you would change it to be more inclusive & that you wouldn't even object to "Medicare for All" concept, if CBO estimates it would be cheaper. Don't say a word about Ryan.
Mitt Romney may not be the nicest man but he's nice enough. I do admire his charitable giving without which he could be a lot richer.
Mitt could leave his party saying what R Reagan said, "Democratic Party left me." He could say his party is too Obstructionist, and that he would welcome an open convention & would be delighted if he were to be drafted.
For a change, Mitt, be honest. Don't be a salesman. You are a good man. Who doesn't have faults? We would disregard the car elevators; forgive you for picking Paul Ryan in 2012.
You should again say a few good things about ACA, that if elected you would change it to be more inclusive & that you wouldn't even object to "Medicare for All" concept, if CBO estimates it would be cheaper. Don't say a word about Ryan.
11
In America anno 2015 few if any people think highly of the Obamacare initiative. One sees it, rather, as a huge boondoggle and one that mainly benefits the insurance companies. Our health care is superior in America, for those like myself with access to its highest levels, which my Federal benefits afford me. One injectable medication I use, genetically engineered "biological", costs the benefit plan over $1 million a year. Guess I wouldn't be on it if the Senators themselves had no recourse to it...were I living in a lower tax bracket and working in private, it's exceedingly likely I would not be on this wonder drug. Classism has riven every aspect of American life and we discuss this salient fact all too infrequently, for my taste.
19
Is the COST over $1,000,000 a year? Or is the PRICE over $1,000,000 a year? When I look at my explanation of benefits and see that the insurance company was charged (price) $1,000 for a medication I use, but they "allowed" a payment of $12.00 (cost), one knows that something funny is going on. People are still making money on that $12.00, so what's with the original $1,000 price?
1
If it wasn't for Obamacare, you would have used up your lifetime benefit amount and been cut off from any further coverage. Few people think highly of it because of "the heck with you jack, I've got mine" mentality so pervasive in America.
2
Don't kid yourself about insurance premiums. They're going up, but in a sneaky way. What's happening is that they keep the premium rise to a minimum but adjust "allowable" payments. It's attune to keeping the box the same size while reducing the volume inside. I support universal health care, but be careful that in supporting Obamacare we don't develop a bias that serves to ignore the avarice of the insurance industry; because they don't quit.
26
I think Mr. Romney's skills may be misunderstood.
Some corporate restructuring has meant taking well-operating firms and stripping out assets for the benefit of insiders. The skill needed is to know the weaknesses of corporate governance well enough to prevent the other stakeholders from stopping the maneuver.
What is left is a potentially troubled firm where many creditors, suppliers, and employees are at risk of losses. If the firm survives, as a minority of start-ups working on a shoestring do, so much the better. But the insiders and their consultants come out ahead in any case.
I imagine that the relatively good economic times from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s generated a lot of firms that had a lot of assets and whose owners had reached an age where they were personally ready to exit. In any case, leveraged buyouts boomed in the 1980s and we were off to the corporate restructuring races.
Some corporate restructuring has meant taking well-operating firms and stripping out assets for the benefit of insiders. The skill needed is to know the weaknesses of corporate governance well enough to prevent the other stakeholders from stopping the maneuver.
What is left is a potentially troubled firm where many creditors, suppliers, and employees are at risk of losses. If the firm survives, as a minority of start-ups working on a shoestring do, so much the better. But the insiders and their consultants come out ahead in any case.
I imagine that the relatively good economic times from the late 1940s through the mid-1970s generated a lot of firms that had a lot of assets and whose owners had reached an age where they were personally ready to exit. In any case, leveraged buyouts boomed in the 1980s and we were off to the corporate restructuring races.
19
Some significant portion of the American populace confuses sharp practice with wisdom. See Trump, Donald.
Even Bush 41 at age 91 is shocked by the beating that Jeb! is taking at the hands of Tea Party and Freedom Caucus republicans to a point that he doesn't recognize the party.
Just like Mitt, the more that Jeb! tries to fake his loyalty to the extremists taking over the GOP, the less respect and lower poll numbers plague his campaign. Mitt, Jeb! and Poppy Bush must be feeling like they are in the Twilight Zone or some kind of parallel universe where their ideas and accomplishments should be respected but aren't by an increasingly radical Republican Party.
Just like Mitt, the more that Jeb! tries to fake his loyalty to the extremists taking over the GOP, the less respect and lower poll numbers plague his campaign. Mitt, Jeb! and Poppy Bush must be feeling like they are in the Twilight Zone or some kind of parallel universe where their ideas and accomplishments should be respected but aren't by an increasingly radical Republican Party.
23
Kind of like Nelson Rockefeller, but farther out to the right?
Sorry but Jeb! is not losing because of the Tea Party, and his elderly dad is biased because it's his son and his own legacy.
Jeb! is losing because he's a weakling -- he makes stupid gaffs every time he opens his mouth -- he lacks dignity and leadership qualities. He's been a total disappointment. Even the "!" he has used in his campaign media is just plain embarrassing and it makes him look like a fool -- yet he keeps it! Now every time I type his name, I used it (JEB!).
He is pathetic, and he will be dropping out of the race very shortly.
Jeb! is losing because he's a weakling -- he makes stupid gaffs every time he opens his mouth -- he lacks dignity and leadership qualities. He's been a total disappointment. Even the "!" he has used in his campaign media is just plain embarrassing and it makes him look like a fool -- yet he keeps it! Now every time I type his name, I used it (JEB!).
He is pathetic, and he will be dropping out of the race very shortly.
Mitt Romney has always been an empty suit/shell of a man. When he made his bones he was probably hired because he brought his dads rolodex. That got him started and the Bain name kept his foot in the door. Sort of like Bush, without the family name to kickstart the career the career never starts. There are a whole bunch of chard bodies along the way that had much more talent than Romney. He just had the luxury of standing on third base when the hit to get home came.
26
Paul,
Good article.
However, just to be balanced, perhaps you should examine NY Medicaid and how it affects NY budgets. The budget of every level of government is in a Medicaid straight jacket, and, everyone knows it. Holes in roads go unresolved for years because the Medicaid budget is fixed (money from US gov does not help). Bridges never get fixed. The entire state's infrastructure is falling apart, and, some of the best infrastructure in the state was done in the 30's under WPA. Why? The Medicaid budget has grown to eat all other budgets.
So, making fun of states that have forgone the onerous "Medicaid" money is a good way to look good to the ignorant, no doubt many, but, not to those in the NY legislature, or, well informed governors, or, even mildly informed readers.
Good article.
However, just to be balanced, perhaps you should examine NY Medicaid and how it affects NY budgets. The budget of every level of government is in a Medicaid straight jacket, and, everyone knows it. Holes in roads go unresolved for years because the Medicaid budget is fixed (money from US gov does not help). Bridges never get fixed. The entire state's infrastructure is falling apart, and, some of the best infrastructure in the state was done in the 30's under WPA. Why? The Medicaid budget has grown to eat all other budgets.
So, making fun of states that have forgone the onerous "Medicaid" money is a good way to look good to the ignorant, no doubt many, but, not to those in the NY legislature, or, well informed governors, or, even mildly informed readers.
7
And just make sure the balance stays in balance, we should let people get sick and die because they have no health insurance, but at least we can drive on roads without potholes.
Medicaid is a disaster. No physician wants to see medicaid patients because the pay is below minimum wage. And those receiving it are often able-bodied people who should be fixing our infrastructure, rather than working off the books or just not working. How is it that my trauma ICU is filled with medicaid-receiving motorcyclists and drunk drivers? They don't have money for an insurance premium because they don't work or don't declare income, yet have money for reckless pursuits that cost us tons of money? When is the country going to call it what it is- laziness, fraud, dependency on the welfare trough? People need to start taking responsibility for their own choices, then we will have money to help those who cannot.
He changed. First he was Mr. Liberal in Mass., then he went far right to be president. Didn't work.
13
Sure legislative accomplishment is nice, particularly if it's done in a bipartisan fashion as Romneycare was in highly Democratic Massachusetts.
But the bottom line for Mitt Romney is , if the choice is between helping society as a whole or the carried interest loophole, the carried interest loophole takes precedence.
Car elevators ain't cheap ya know!
But the bottom line for Mitt Romney is , if the choice is between helping society as a whole or the carried interest loophole, the carried interest loophole takes precedence.
Car elevators ain't cheap ya know!
42
The GOP only rewards those who can further enrich their party. Implicitly that means duping people to buy into their fairy tale that the path to riches and American dream can only happen if you elect moi. Cue the GOP talking points about tax cuts for the rich, trickle-down economics and the “big, bad” government.
The problem with Romney is that he got caught insulting 47% of the population as “victims”. Ooops. You’re not supposed to say that in public, thus ending his candidacy for POTUS. I’m sure the only regret he had was getting caught.
What Romney said was a gaffe and we know that gaffes can be terminal. Just ask Kevin McCarthy. So, Romney had to reverse himself or never live it down. On the Right, the truth can never be spoken. Everything is a mirage, a make-believe world where facts die and liars thrive.
Romney tried to live in their world, but couldn’t keep up the facade. If Romney wants to be part of the GOP, he has to run from his past, otherwise he will be rejected by today’s GOP nexus of power.
The problem with Romney is that he got caught insulting 47% of the population as “victims”. Ooops. You’re not supposed to say that in public, thus ending his candidacy for POTUS. I’m sure the only regret he had was getting caught.
What Romney said was a gaffe and we know that gaffes can be terminal. Just ask Kevin McCarthy. So, Romney had to reverse himself or never live it down. On the Right, the truth can never be spoken. Everything is a mirage, a make-believe world where facts die and liars thrive.
Romney tried to live in their world, but couldn’t keep up the facade. If Romney wants to be part of the GOP, he has to run from his past, otherwise he will be rejected by today’s GOP nexus of power.
182
Poor Mitt Romney. Will he ever live down being blamed for ObamaCare? But he certainly won’t if he grasps sufficiently at relevance these days to boast about it to the Boston Globe.
And as to ObamaCare, it’s interesting that Paul continues to defend it as successful when President Obama’s own HHS has lowered its estimates of how many will join the state exchanges in 2016 – 9.4 million to 11.4 million, instead of the projected 20 million. And 2015 is coming in at only 70% of projections. There seem to be over 10 million Americans who would prefer to pay the $695 or 2.5% of their earnings, whichever is higher, as penalty to avoid buying an ObamaCare-compliant health plan, because they find that even after subsidies they can’t afford one. Premiums are going up in 2016, too – perhaps by quite a lot. So, we get into this death-spiral where people can’t afford the ACA mandates, even WITH subsidies, so premiums need to go up to make up for the loss of people in the system; and the increased cost causes even more people to bail out, and around and around we go. ObamaCare, apart from the extended Medicaid in states that accepted it, will be a fine program with five people in it.
The ACA clearly will be reopened for major surgery in 2017, with or without a Republican president. Perhaps we can finally get around to doing what Mr. Obama promised to do as a candidate in 2008: reform our unsustainable healthcare entitlements so that they work for America.
And as to ObamaCare, it’s interesting that Paul continues to defend it as successful when President Obama’s own HHS has lowered its estimates of how many will join the state exchanges in 2016 – 9.4 million to 11.4 million, instead of the projected 20 million. And 2015 is coming in at only 70% of projections. There seem to be over 10 million Americans who would prefer to pay the $695 or 2.5% of their earnings, whichever is higher, as penalty to avoid buying an ObamaCare-compliant health plan, because they find that even after subsidies they can’t afford one. Premiums are going up in 2016, too – perhaps by quite a lot. So, we get into this death-spiral where people can’t afford the ACA mandates, even WITH subsidies, so premiums need to go up to make up for the loss of people in the system; and the increased cost causes even more people to bail out, and around and around we go. ObamaCare, apart from the extended Medicaid in states that accepted it, will be a fine program with five people in it.
The ACA clearly will be reopened for major surgery in 2017, with or without a Republican president. Perhaps we can finally get around to doing what Mr. Obama promised to do as a candidate in 2008: reform our unsustainable healthcare entitlements so that they work for America.
6
You bought the WSJ misinformation hook, line, and sinker Richard. Here are the actual numbers:
http://acasignups.net/15/10/26/two-glaring-errors-wsj-anti-obamacare-edi...
http://acasignups.net/15/10/26/two-glaring-errors-wsj-anti-obamacare-edi...
Republicans seem bent on trotting out their unimaginably worst presidential candidates and promoting the most asinine public policy positions to date. We've come to a low point in America when the only glimmer of sanity they've shown comes from a loser who thinks 47% of Americans are "takers"
23
As the discussion around the ACA continues in your country I keep coming back to the notion that single payer health insurance, similar to most of the developed world, should be a Republican position. All of the US companies that provide health care to their employees suffer a competitive disadvantage to companies in the other countries. Unleash the companies, medicare for all should be at the core of the Republican platform.
127
That is reasonable, which is why the Republicans wont do it!
Thank you for reminding our greedy corporations that were they more concerned for their workers they might even make more millions. Perhaps even relations between employer and employee might improve - might return to human.
1
Single-payer is great..... if you are willing to limit care. Regardless of who pays, patients who want everything, lawyers who want their contingency fees and will sue for any reason, and greedy doctors drive up costs. Medicare is tremendously wasteful for ALL 3 reasons above. Fix that, and then let's see if we can give it to everyone. The way it is now it will break the bank.
Amen! What else can one say?
6
Mitt was/is a good man.... there's a place for him.
4
Really, pleas explanation his virtues. Half the country are takers and he should only pay a 15% tax rate on $25m of income. Great guy.
Sixteen million additional people with health insurance coverage and retaining the industry would once have been seen as a great victory for traditional-type Republicanism. Say about a decade ago, when Romney was in office, and the Heritage Foundation, along with the health insurance lobby, were actively promoting the idea as a conservative alternative to single=payer. Their support evaporated when Obama, seeing single payer was politically impossible, agreed to the more limited reform that now bears his name.
Yes, single-payer would have been better, no, it was not going to happen, even with a brief two-month period when the Senate had sixty Democrats, because one of them was Joe Lieberman. Progressives who now want to blame Obama for the lack of universal coverage are living in their own fantasy land. It was not possible because the votes simply were not there, and Republican Party had decided upon total obstructionism as political strategy. And there they remain, locked in their own bizarro alternate universe, where presidential candidates win votes from their delusional base, by calling so-called Obamacare, "the worst thing since slavery". No, actually today's anti-government, anti-democracy, pro-plutocratic, neo-Confederate Republican Party is the entity which increasingly fits that description.
Yes, single-payer would have been better, no, it was not going to happen, even with a brief two-month period when the Senate had sixty Democrats, because one of them was Joe Lieberman. Progressives who now want to blame Obama for the lack of universal coverage are living in their own fantasy land. It was not possible because the votes simply were not there, and Republican Party had decided upon total obstructionism as political strategy. And there they remain, locked in their own bizarro alternate universe, where presidential candidates win votes from their delusional base, by calling so-called Obamacare, "the worst thing since slavery". No, actually today's anti-government, anti-democracy, pro-plutocratic, neo-Confederate Republican Party is the entity which increasingly fits that description.
659
"Progressives who now want to blame Obama for the lack of universal coverage are living in their own fantasy land."
There are a variety of reasons for blaming President Obama, even among the progressives, one of them is he's black & the novelty died out. Then a touch of envy as he achieved, which no one else could.
I was sick of Chuck Schumer accusing Obama for taking up ACA in his first term. Fat chance for that to happen in his second term when Republicans have the upper hand.
I don't know why Schumer is sore with Obama. I don't think because he supported Hillary Clinton in 2008.
There are a variety of reasons for blaming President Obama, even among the progressives, one of them is he's black & the novelty died out. Then a touch of envy as he achieved, which no one else could.
I was sick of Chuck Schumer accusing Obama for taking up ACA in his first term. Fat chance for that to happen in his second term when Republicans have the upper hand.
I don't know why Schumer is sore with Obama. I don't think because he supported Hillary Clinton in 2008.
1
Single-payer was not impossible! Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote. There should have been a rollup of Medicare single-payer for all from the start. Perhaps it would have been too difficult logistically to phase in everybody at once so it could have been made a phased rollup starting with children to 18, who already get subsidies, and moving down from 65 to 55.
Then moving up 10 years until they meet in the middle...
The Corporate Democrats, Obama and Clinton just refused to do what should have done to begin with...
Then moving up 10 years until they meet in the middle...
The Corporate Democrats, Obama and Clinton just refused to do what should have done to begin with...
1
My disappointment with Obama began when he gave up the Public Option without any kind of resistance, and instead did so under the disillusion that making a concession early on would make the GOP more reasonable. They, of course, saw it as a sign of weakness and firmed their opposition.
Obama should have made the GOP seat that one out and even if he was willing to give it up, as he was, he had the perfect bargaining chip. He should have feigned that it was THE most important part of his plan, and that he owed it to his base and make the GOP come up with something for him to concede to his base that he got something. The moment Obama caved on that the air started coming out of his balloon for me.
I agree that the Public Option wasn't going to happen, but it's called politics for a reason, and I think Obama underplayed the hand he was dealt.
Obama should have made the GOP seat that one out and even if he was willing to give it up, as he was, he had the perfect bargaining chip. He should have feigned that it was THE most important part of his plan, and that he owed it to his base and make the GOP come up with something for him to concede to his base that he got something. The moment Obama caved on that the air started coming out of his balloon for me.
I agree that the Public Option wasn't going to happen, but it's called politics for a reason, and I think Obama underplayed the hand he was dealt.
What is taught in the sermons on Sunday is so many churches is absolutely the opposite of what Jesus' ministry was about. Welcome the new comer, the stranger in your midst, take care of the poor and the sick, visit and care for those imprisoned. Seriously the minister who in my town stands up and preaches a sermon like that will find himself unemployed on Monday and they know it. And so they feed into the fear of change that motivates the conservative mind. And yes that makes Obamacare (ACA) the worst thing to come along in ages. It helps those people, the brown ones, the poor ones. The House member from Lexington (SC) was horrified those years ago that an undocumented immigrant with TB might get free treatment because Joe had no concern of his grandchildren sharing a play ground with others who have untreated TB. They not only do not want to help others, they do not see how it is in their self interest. And so back to church they will go next Sunday not to be scolded for ignoring the sick and the poor and for making the stranger feel as welcome as a tooth ache. Truly the ME generation.
60
Try your local UCC church.
Obamacare is just another form of privatizing what should be a public benefit or service. It should be replaced with Single Payer or Medicare for all, absent its ties to private insurers and administrators. Our problem is, that so many services are privatized and should be in the commons or the public sector. We need first of all less military defense complex and more domestic spending on just about everything else. But the banks don't make as much money on that as they do on wars. Pope Francis is right on so many things. But as we know well, guns and butter do not exist so well together. We need much more butter and a whole lot less guns! Enter Bernie Sanders. Many of us hope he will make it, and if he doesn't, there might be a significant movement to the likes of Jill Stein. I am tired of voting for the lesser evil. The banks have way too much power and should be broken up. That would be a major step towards rebooting our economy in favor of the people, including our healthcare.
68
Single payer was a non-starter. If you want it, go get it.
Single-payer a la England or Canada would not be tolerated here. Do you want to be told no, you can't have that test or operation, or that you have to wait a year for it?
A new challenge to Obamacare heads to the Supreme Court today, based on the idea that taxation legislation must originate in the House of Representatives.
Voting, abortion, guns, health care, climate change -- we keep adding to the things on which we have no national consensus, and on which we seemingly cannot even agree on what the problem is (e.g., is it voter fraud, or is it disenfranchisement?) . Nor do we seem to have some shared framework within which we agree to what are facts. Reality itself is disputed. Winning elections no longer confers legitimacy (e.g., the response to Obama's election and re-election; and the promise to begin Clinton's impeachment the day of her inauguration should she win; or the ability of the 40-member Freedom Caucus to wag the dog of the GOP majority of 247). Even the last-resort dispute resolution mechanism - the Supreme Court - is trusted less and less.
If science, elections, legislation, court rulings - all with their methods of creating a prevailing view - don't work, what is next? Duels to the death?
Voting, abortion, guns, health care, climate change -- we keep adding to the things on which we have no national consensus, and on which we seemingly cannot even agree on what the problem is (e.g., is it voter fraud, or is it disenfranchisement?) . Nor do we seem to have some shared framework within which we agree to what are facts. Reality itself is disputed. Winning elections no longer confers legitimacy (e.g., the response to Obama's election and re-election; and the promise to begin Clinton's impeachment the day of her inauguration should she win; or the ability of the 40-member Freedom Caucus to wag the dog of the GOP majority of 247). Even the last-resort dispute resolution mechanism - the Supreme Court - is trusted less and less.
If science, elections, legislation, court rulings - all with their methods of creating a prevailing view - don't work, what is next? Duels to the death?
70
Maybe I would prefer duels to the death, particularly if it would mean fewer Republicans.
2
Duels to the death sponsored by corporations and a huge ticket price.
1
How would Benjamin Franklin chastise the Republicans of today? Gentlemen, either we hang together or surely we will hang separately. Civics 101: We, the People, in order to form a more perfect Union.... What good are we as a nation if we can't help the least among us?
68
Here in Iowa we see our civic duties, health care, being auctioned off for profits.
2
I miss Willard Mitty.
He was, just like Reagan and Boy George, a literal guy cheerleader.
He, like Reagan (WWII) and Boy George (Viet Nam) dodged going to Viet Nam, a war he marched in support of.
Mitty, just like Reagan and Boy George had some really bad ideas of what he would do as Commander in Chief, that is, to fulfill his promises to Netanyahu and Adelson, to go to war with Iran.
Where Mitty would have been unique was that in five generations, not one Romney ever wore a US uniform, not one is a veteran.
Anyone thinking that is because Mormons are pacifists need only google Mountain Meadows Massacre.
Ever wonder what Abu Ghraib is, in Farsi?
He was, just like Reagan and Boy George, a literal guy cheerleader.
He, like Reagan (WWII) and Boy George (Viet Nam) dodged going to Viet Nam, a war he marched in support of.
Mitty, just like Reagan and Boy George had some really bad ideas of what he would do as Commander in Chief, that is, to fulfill his promises to Netanyahu and Adelson, to go to war with Iran.
Where Mitty would have been unique was that in five generations, not one Romney ever wore a US uniform, not one is a veteran.
Anyone thinking that is because Mormons are pacifists need only google Mountain Meadows Massacre.
Ever wonder what Abu Ghraib is, in Farsi?
42
It shouldn't surprise anyone that Romney is prepared to trash his greatest achievement in public life in order to adhere to the ideologically pure Republican party line. One constantly comes across people who have spent their entire lives working for the government and receiving benefits in kind like free education or low cost healthcare (a lot of them ex military) who spend all their time damning government. Ryan is another classic case. This man has spent almost his entire adult life feeding at the public trough and yet he continually proclaims government as the enemy of the people. The hypocrisy is off the charts.
271
John is correct about people who work for the government and also decry the government. I saw a major change in that thinking amongst federal workers after the last government shutdown.
If Ryan has been in politics all his life -- what do you consider the Clintons? or Bernie Sanders?
On my way back to Japan after visiting Texas this Summer, I met a Dallas plastic surgeon who was headed to Tokyo for a conference. The ACA came up in our conversation, and I asked him what he thought about Texas being one of the states that had turned down tens of billions of dollars of federal funds for Medicaid expansion. According to the doctor, the main reason that Texas and other state officials had turned the money down was that the states would be left to assume all the costs on their own after 10 years.
I had long assumed that those states were just rebels and wanted to sabotage one of the ACA's key provisions for political reasons, and I have no idea if they might have really been holding out for a better offer. Either way, it was tempting to ask whether it was prudent for state governments to turn down a multi-billion dollar infusion of funds on the grounds that they would eventually have to provide for the needs of their poorest citizens on their own. Red states are already known to be the net receivers in federal outlays and the blue states are the donors – isn't ten years of support for the indigent long enough?
I had long assumed that those states were just rebels and wanted to sabotage one of the ACA's key provisions for political reasons, and I have no idea if they might have really been holding out for a better offer. Either way, it was tempting to ask whether it was prudent for state governments to turn down a multi-billion dollar infusion of funds on the grounds that they would eventually have to provide for the needs of their poorest citizens on their own. Red states are already known to be the net receivers in federal outlays and the blue states are the donors – isn't ten years of support for the indigent long enough?
132
I can't recall if the doctor said the states would have to cover the costs of Medicaid expansion on their own after ten or twenty years, but even ten years of federal support seems reasonable and not something that any state government looking out for its own citizens and their best interests should turn down.
35
The Federal government will pay 93% of costs for the first nine years, and will pay 100% of costs for new enrollees who join through next year indefinitely.
It does seem that the States will be on the hook for all costs for old enrollees after 2022. Of course pressure will be on both the Feds and the States to keep it going after that.
It does seem that the States will be on the hook for all costs for old enrollees after 2022. Of course pressure will be on both the Feds and the States to keep it going after that.
If I recollect correctly, the federal government, through revenues raised by the ACA from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, subsidizes 100% of state expanded Medicaid for 10 years. After 10 years, the federal government subsidizes 90% of those costs. This is a great benefit for the poor in all states and it is a shame and a crime against humanity that republican governors and state legislators have refused to accept the Medicaid expansion.
2
Unfortunately he cannot give up the illusions' his personality and the party he is in is cast in cement now. He'll be a pariah for life if he now changes and starting celebrating his health policies. How unfortunate can a man be.
17
Well deserved Karma, Mr. Oyesanya, or what goes around comes around or crap rolls down hill or you get what you ask for or be careful of the holes you dig, these all can be applied to Willard.
Mitt Romney throughout hisi life has prided himself on getting things
done. He actually wants to help people. Today's GOP wants
none of that. They only want to hurt people who are already
on the margins or one illness or natural disaster from ruin.
it really was Obamneycare. It works. Real people have been
helped.
Watch Ben Carson trying to expolain his plan to eliminate
Medicare. It is amazing. He can't even explain his own
plan. But making sense is not the coin of the realm in today's
GOP
History teaches us that ignorance is not bliss.
done. He actually wants to help people. Today's GOP wants
none of that. They only want to hurt people who are already
on the margins or one illness or natural disaster from ruin.
it really was Obamneycare. It works. Real people have been
helped.
Watch Ben Carson trying to expolain his plan to eliminate
Medicare. It is amazing. He can't even explain his own
plan. But making sense is not the coin of the realm in today's
GOP
History teaches us that ignorance is not bliss.
51
I have not heard Ben Carson's speech but I did listen tobTrump's and there is just no substance at all. He just seems to pump the crowds on a few simplistic but popularistic ideas. But nothing on policy. Very scary.
1
Mitt, we hardly knew ye. When you were around you were such a hoot. "Corporations are people, my friend." Elevators for cars. Oh, and speaking of cars, what ever became of poor Seamus? Then there were the trees in Michigan. There was the transparency in your tax returns. What did you pay on your billions? 12.5%? Ah, the days in which bought and sold companies and after chopping them up, sent the remaining jobs overseas to sweatshop countries. Then there was the cherry on the sundae: 47%. Dr. Krugman mentions the deleterious effect on the economies in the states whose governors and legislatures refused Medicaid expansion to truly make your own idea go national. Ah, Mittens, you took an idea from the Heritage Foundation's laboratory and made it work in Massachusetts. Then you ran from it because it departed from your party's orthodoxy. It is a thousand pities that you didn't have the courage to defend your own. And the lovely Anne even managed to tell us "it's our turn." Ah, Mittens, we hardly knew ye and you're a darned sight better candidate than any of the buffoons in line to succeed you as the nominee. Gee, please rethink your shrinking retirement from public life. We all could use a laugh.
70
Didn't Romney say Russia was our greatest geopolitical threat and Obama mocked him? Correct me if I am wrong but hasn't Russia been hacking our computers? Haven't they been violating our air space and our territorial waters off the east coast with their subs?
Would you like to talk about the arms agreement, the one where we gave up real missiles and Putin gave up decommissioned ones?
Would you like to talk about Crimea? Belarus? Ukraine? And don't you just love how Russia tells us to get out of Syrian airspace and we do?
Why don't you mock that.
Would you like to talk about the arms agreement, the one where we gave up real missiles and Putin gave up decommissioned ones?
Would you like to talk about Crimea? Belarus? Ukraine? And don't you just love how Russia tells us to get out of Syrian airspace and we do?
Why don't you mock that.
2
Hey, leave our trees alone. They're totally the perfect height. Every last one of them!
1
If he would only Adios!
One key problem, although understandable, is the extremists in the Republican Party are comfortable with their extremism because they count on the Democrats to to the Right Thing. So shutting down the federal government is okay because President Obama will declare a long list of federal responsibilities to be "essential" and order public employees providing them to continue doing so. But what would happen if he did not? What would happen if at 12:01 a.m. on Day X all air traffic controllers lock their towers, no checks flow to Social Security recipients nor to Defense contractors, and there are no weather reports? Ideally this could be done only in those Congressional districts whose representatives voted in favor a of shutdown but that would convert the matter into a charge of political retaliation. So shut it all down. Signs at Border Patrol offices saying they are closed until further notice, FBI agents home drinking coffee, no-one processing VA benefits claims. If the argument is we should run the federal budget like a household that means when there is no money there is no food, fuel, shelter, etc. And we all know the party promoting such a shutdown, promoting individuals responsibility, and promoting making hard choices will step forward and pronounce the ensuing chaos and hardship a good thing and accept the consequences. OK, I know, President Obama is too much of a wimp to go this far but kill air traffic control, Defense procurement, and the FBI for starters.
35
I think this is a great idea. Back in 2013, when the sequester resulted in air traffic controllers being furloughed and affecting their travel, the GOP congress couldn't act fast enough to restore funding to that particular area.
Conservatives don't really hate all government programs -- only those that benefit others, but not them. Once their lives are affected by a shutdown, they will be wailing for an end.
Conservatives don't really hate all government programs -- only those that benefit others, but not them. Once their lives are affected by a shutdown, they will be wailing for an end.
1
Thank you USA999. I'm ready to call these government-by=tantrum crazies' bluff. Kill the nation to kill Planned Parenthood. Or the ACA. Some supremely existential GOP national priority like that. There would be one long howl of rage from California to the New York harbor. Wall Street in shambles. Parks closed. Putin and Xi Jinping popping champagne. I'm tired of these despicably selfish GOP wannabe anarchists. Let's give them the chance to destroy themselves.
The Tea Party nuts, sorry, the Freedom Caucus nuts, would probably cheer.
Please Professor Krugman, please STOP with the brand hijacking. Whatever it is, this is NOT the Republican Party created by Abraham Lincoln or the rational-if-pro-big-business GOP led by such mature adults as Teddy Roosevelt and Dwight Eisenhower.
This thing is something completely different, and it is just hijacking the brand because the dynamics work that way. As Abe proved, it's quite difficult to start a really new political party because the American system is winner-take-all, not a coalition system. Lots of great ideas appeared in our Constitution, but that one came later, so America seems to have two stable situations: Two balanced parties or one dominating party.
Whatever it is, it needs a new name. Truth in advertising would call for something like the Anti-Future Party, or the Anti-Moderate Party, or even the Anti-Mainstream Party, because it's so fundamentally negative. However, I personally favor neo-GOP in consideration of such mutant brands as neoconservatives. They are NOT the same thing.
This brand is just confusing a lot of voters. The honest Republican voters can't figure out why they don't agree with their own politicians on the actual issues. However, the sad part is they can't vote the other way. Apparently it's mostly a family thing.
There ought to be a law against that sort of brand hijacking. Oh, wait. If you're expecting the neo-GOP Congress to DO something, you better NOT wait. You'll starve first.
This thing is something completely different, and it is just hijacking the brand because the dynamics work that way. As Abe proved, it's quite difficult to start a really new political party because the American system is winner-take-all, not a coalition system. Lots of great ideas appeared in our Constitution, but that one came later, so America seems to have two stable situations: Two balanced parties or one dominating party.
Whatever it is, it needs a new name. Truth in advertising would call for something like the Anti-Future Party, or the Anti-Moderate Party, or even the Anti-Mainstream Party, because it's so fundamentally negative. However, I personally favor neo-GOP in consideration of such mutant brands as neoconservatives. They are NOT the same thing.
This brand is just confusing a lot of voters. The honest Republican voters can't figure out why they don't agree with their own politicians on the actual issues. However, the sad part is they can't vote the other way. Apparently it's mostly a family thing.
There ought to be a law against that sort of brand hijacking. Oh, wait. If you're expecting the neo-GOP Congress to DO something, you better NOT wait. You'll starve first.
30
They'd do well to hijack another brand, the Know-Nothing Party. It's apt on the level of their wanton ignorance, and the spite-based policymaking of today's GOP resembles nothing so strongly as that virulent mid-19th century movement whose official name was the far more innocuous "American Party."
1
I see Romneycare in the context of (1) the governor having been forced into doing something about how care for the then-uninsured would be paid for, and (2) the governor doing things during his time in office like eliminating drug treatment program beds. So I don't think Romneycare came out of largess, I think Romney was pretty clear that he thought he was making people take responsibility and pay their fair share. I see Romneycare as one of those things that satisfies one group for one set of reasons and another group for another set -- nothing wrong with that, but as a predictor that Romney will start acting or believing like the other set of people who like Romneycare for another set of reasons, I wouldn't extrapolate that from the other points on the line we have from his policies as governor. Many voters in Massachusetts fell for that more benign interpretation of Romney when we voted for him instead of voting for the Democratic candidate, and after Romney's term in office, many of us would not have voted for Romney again, even without his turn towards severe conservativism as a national candidate for president.
34
There are interview clips on Youtube where Romney characterizes the Massachusetts Health Insurance plan as an extremely Conservative program, as it makes everyone responsible for their own costs, and nobody gets a free ride.
21
Massachusetts shifted the finacial insolvency of its Hospitals due to Reagancare (EMTALA) to individual responsibility and waivers or extra Medicaid funds from the Feds. In this sense it is the same as Obamacare and it fits with Romney's history of solving corporate insolvency by finding new sorced of financing. GOP does not have a clue why this whole financial debacle was caused by Reagan's unfunded mandate and the need for federal funding for healthcare for the poor and elderly. Left out is the uninsured working class whose employers for whatever reason believe that in true capitalism, employers should not have to pay for health insurance. It is that requirement for employers with over 50 employees that irritates the Cons the most. simple solution- do away with deduction for employer funded health care benefits and require health savings accounts instead.
1
I would feel some sympathy for Mitt Romney if he, like George H. W. Bush, had done more to solve the problems of his party's shift into extreme right ideology and policy-making. Romneycare is working, as is Obamacare, but now that he is no longer running--or is he still hoping to get in the race?--why on earth will he not just admit that both his program, and the federal version, for all their faults, are 1) far better than the prior status quo and 2) are both working?
Instead, he has to back track, or use weasel words, or do whatever is required to appear opposed to his policy's successor. It's just absurd. Meanwhile, many millions of Americans still cannot access Medicaid because Republican governors and legislatures refuse to sign on, depriving people of the insurance and care they need; we are spending over $1 trillion on these metastasizing wars; and we also are watching our national infrastructure crumble, as Congress's GOP leadership bickers like penned roosters.
Perhaps in your next column you might step away from the recurrent theme--yes, we need to hear about it--of the disastrous Republican party of today, and talk about the pressing matter of our national infrastructure and what it might cost to repair and expand it. It might greatly help Mrs. Clinton or whoever the eventual president turns out to be, as well as the new Congress, especially if it once again has a Democratic majority.
Instead, he has to back track, or use weasel words, or do whatever is required to appear opposed to his policy's successor. It's just absurd. Meanwhile, many millions of Americans still cannot access Medicaid because Republican governors and legislatures refuse to sign on, depriving people of the insurance and care they need; we are spending over $1 trillion on these metastasizing wars; and we also are watching our national infrastructure crumble, as Congress's GOP leadership bickers like penned roosters.
Perhaps in your next column you might step away from the recurrent theme--yes, we need to hear about it--of the disastrous Republican party of today, and talk about the pressing matter of our national infrastructure and what it might cost to repair and expand it. It might greatly help Mrs. Clinton or whoever the eventual president turns out to be, as well as the new Congress, especially if it once again has a Democratic majority.
28
Blame the Corporate, Conservative media. What does that mean?
Over the last 2 decades, perception has become reality. Before Fox News (October 1996) the media didn’t play favorites. One side didn’t dominate the airwaves 24/7 like today. Today, that’s no longer the case.
Six conglomerates control 90% of our media which means they have an agenda to push which is not’s in the people’s best interests. For Faux News viewers/ listeners, they are less informed than people than who don’t watch their propaganda, um news.
What does this have to do with Mr. Romney??
Well, it seems Mr. Romney can’t speak the truth for fear of reprisal from said Conservative media. And we all know the wrath Conservatives can dish out. Just look at the unprecedented 11 hour grilling Hillary Clinton was subject to by the GOP. Sure, she is a Democrat, but Boehner wasn’t spared either which is why he throw in the towel.
Many people on both sides of the aisle just stay under the radar and try not to commit any faux-pas, but if they do, they better do a quick 180 degree turn or face the heat that will come their way.
This is why there are few second acts in politics. One or two major missteps and its curtain for you. Hypocrisy runs rampant, but it might just save you career…
Over the last 2 decades, perception has become reality. Before Fox News (October 1996) the media didn’t play favorites. One side didn’t dominate the airwaves 24/7 like today. Today, that’s no longer the case.
Six conglomerates control 90% of our media which means they have an agenda to push which is not’s in the people’s best interests. For Faux News viewers/ listeners, they are less informed than people than who don’t watch their propaganda, um news.
What does this have to do with Mr. Romney??
Well, it seems Mr. Romney can’t speak the truth for fear of reprisal from said Conservative media. And we all know the wrath Conservatives can dish out. Just look at the unprecedented 11 hour grilling Hillary Clinton was subject to by the GOP. Sure, she is a Democrat, but Boehner wasn’t spared either which is why he throw in the towel.
Many people on both sides of the aisle just stay under the radar and try not to commit any faux-pas, but if they do, they better do a quick 180 degree turn or face the heat that will come their way.
This is why there are few second acts in politics. One or two major missteps and its curtain for you. Hypocrisy runs rampant, but it might just save you career…
265
You ask: "Blame the Corporate, Conservative media. What does that mean?"
Among other things, it means that one media outlet, FoxNews, according to a Suffolk University poll from several years ago, was rated as the most trusted political news source by 28% of those surveyed. CNN came in at 18%. ABC, CBS, and NBC--combined--came to 22%: six points less than Fox. The undecided among those surveyed was 12%. It's likely these proportions still hold, and are possibly worse for NBC News, since the poll was prior to the troubles of Brian Williams.
Pundits have observed that the political reporting of the major networks is fairly tepid, today, because they all fear the accusation of being "unfair." Accused by the "Fair and balanced" pundits of FoxNews.
Fox pundit Charles Krauthammer made this observation: [The poll is] extremely powerful for one major reason. It broke the monopoly that the left had, the liberals had on all the media for about 30 years. ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, PBS, the major papers, as you mentioned earlier, the universities, all of the commanding heights of the culture."
The cultural heights have been leveled by Fox.
Now, 28% is not a majority, but it's a sufficient chunk of the population to help swing any election or congressional vote, or at least to create the stalemates we've seen in the house and senate.
So it's little wonder that Romney-care and Obamacare have been given less than a fair shake in a significant portion of the media.
Among other things, it means that one media outlet, FoxNews, according to a Suffolk University poll from several years ago, was rated as the most trusted political news source by 28% of those surveyed. CNN came in at 18%. ABC, CBS, and NBC--combined--came to 22%: six points less than Fox. The undecided among those surveyed was 12%. It's likely these proportions still hold, and are possibly worse for NBC News, since the poll was prior to the troubles of Brian Williams.
Pundits have observed that the political reporting of the major networks is fairly tepid, today, because they all fear the accusation of being "unfair." Accused by the "Fair and balanced" pundits of FoxNews.
Fox pundit Charles Krauthammer made this observation: [The poll is] extremely powerful for one major reason. It broke the monopoly that the left had, the liberals had on all the media for about 30 years. ABC, NBC, CBS, NPR, PBS, the major papers, as you mentioned earlier, the universities, all of the commanding heights of the culture."
The cultural heights have been leveled by Fox.
Now, 28% is not a majority, but it's a sufficient chunk of the population to help swing any election or congressional vote, or at least to create the stalemates we've seen in the house and senate.
So it's little wonder that Romney-care and Obamacare have been given less than a fair shake in a significant portion of the media.
1
Thanks. Spot on. This is the problem and it should be corrected. American society is being dumbed down and creating a problem for our future. This week Dr. K warned that there were signs of global contraction in his blog. Then this appeared in my inbox and also sends an alarm about the American society.
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/25/in_defense_of_american_elitism_the_alarm...
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/25/in_defense_of_american_elitism_the_alarm...
3
You know what will be most educational Professor K ? The day we will either know or will be able to figure out the state of mind of the people who actually think that programmes, that are for the good of the American people should be opposed.
Imagine the calculation that leads to that result. That is just in case I am stupid and couldn't make sense of it.
Who knows ? Maybe there is some sense in non-sense that I can't conceive. Maybe on that day I will be a part of the Dark Side myself ?
Imagine the calculation that leads to that result. That is just in case I am stupid and couldn't make sense of it.
Who knows ? Maybe there is some sense in non-sense that I can't conceive. Maybe on that day I will be a part of the Dark Side myself ?
5
It's simple: the Republican brand has shifted from "big government social programs are bad" to "all government is bad." Just as in the French Revolution, the folks seeking power make demands which are more and more extreme. For Republicans, this means that today's position becomes tomorrow's creeping communism.
The only thing that'll turn this around is to stop the unreasoning fear driving this radicalism. Given Rupert Murdock's influence on the media, I'm not sure how anyone can reassure the general population that their fears are not realistic.
The only thing that'll turn this around is to stop the unreasoning fear driving this radicalism. Given Rupert Murdock's influence on the media, I'm not sure how anyone can reassure the general population that their fears are not realistic.
9
Mr Krugman,
What you say about Mitt Romney applies also to most of the 2014 Democratic Congressional candidates. They distanced themselves both from Obama the man and from his major accomplishments, including the Affordable Care Act. I would ask them today how did it feel, and how do like the results (i.e. losing both houses by wide margins. The problem with Romney and those Tea Party Lite Democrats is that they're so used to playing to the latest pole that we have no idea of what they really believe. A losing long term strategy for any politician, Democrat or Republican.
What you say about Mitt Romney applies also to most of the 2014 Democratic Congressional candidates. They distanced themselves both from Obama the man and from his major accomplishments, including the Affordable Care Act. I would ask them today how did it feel, and how do like the results (i.e. losing both houses by wide margins. The problem with Romney and those Tea Party Lite Democrats is that they're so used to playing to the latest pole that we have no idea of what they really believe. A losing long term strategy for any politician, Democrat or Republican.
23
This is not true of the Democratic candidates for president. In the last debate they praised President Obama.
2
I agree that a lot of the problems today stem from the Republican takeover of the Congress. It was really difficult to see Democrats across the land avoiding the president as they campaigned. No correction of the false factoids the other side put out, just lame behavior they thought would protect their own seats.
We all know the ACA is still flawed, but it is what was possible at the time, given the terrible racist and sexist (remember the awful anti-Pelosi efforts), and total obstruction of the entire Republican party.
Let's return the Congress to the Democrats and fix the problems and send those anti-American wingnuts back where they came from. They are literally destroying our country's ability to self-govern.
We all know the ACA is still flawed, but it is what was possible at the time, given the terrible racist and sexist (remember the awful anti-Pelosi efforts), and total obstruction of the entire Republican party.
Let's return the Congress to the Democrats and fix the problems and send those anti-American wingnuts back where they came from. They are literally destroying our country's ability to self-govern.
4
True, good politicians used to separate politics from governing. True, The role of politics–heavyweight fights for power, efforts to embarrass your opponents–takes place in the very historic American buildings built to govern America.
True, America’s political economy is so large, governing also means incredible power.
One party denies its politics of blame and concentration. Its denial helped the Republican party become a wealthy, majority-of-a-minority party. As a majority-of-minorities, they build state parties to control national elections. Many of their US House winners from the states are members of the Tea Party. They love political battles over budgets and funding. They once shut down the entire US government by refusing to vote to fund it, closing it for 18 days. (The US lost $24 billion in GDP!)
Power and wealth are changing the fundamental agreements about the political economy. Tributes to the rich and the poor are opposed in America. In America, the choice is between national benefits or national wealth.
But political economy affects our governing: From its earliest days, America mixed politics with governance. Slavery was its earliest, most important intersection: slavery exposed tensions between government and freedom, and freedom and equality. The two American parties reflect these two positions in their ideals.
Those for wealth say "you can do it." (But you are lazy when you don't.)
Those for benefits recall the faith of the originals: life, liberty.
True, America’s political economy is so large, governing also means incredible power.
One party denies its politics of blame and concentration. Its denial helped the Republican party become a wealthy, majority-of-a-minority party. As a majority-of-minorities, they build state parties to control national elections. Many of their US House winners from the states are members of the Tea Party. They love political battles over budgets and funding. They once shut down the entire US government by refusing to vote to fund it, closing it for 18 days. (The US lost $24 billion in GDP!)
Power and wealth are changing the fundamental agreements about the political economy. Tributes to the rich and the poor are opposed in America. In America, the choice is between national benefits or national wealth.
But political economy affects our governing: From its earliest days, America mixed politics with governance. Slavery was its earliest, most important intersection: slavery exposed tensions between government and freedom, and freedom and equality. The two American parties reflect these two positions in their ideals.
Those for wealth say "you can do it." (But you are lazy when you don't.)
Those for benefits recall the faith of the originals: life, liberty.
13
Paul, you gloss over the defects of Obamacare too quickly. You say,
“How good is the insurance thus obtained? Not perfect: despite subsidies, policies are still hard for some to afford, and deductibles and co-pays can be onerous.”
For those who can least afford it, those inadequate subsidies are serious. The for profit middlemen (insurance companies) is unnecessary and adds substantially to the cost of healthcare. Recently there have been mergers between large Health Insurers, hefty premium increases and Wall Street buying up generics as investment vehicles charging unconscionable price increases- all boding unfavorably to the long-term success of Obamacare.
Democrats silently agree to all the increase in military spending so they don’t appear as wimps on defense and rationalize it by protecting our armed forces once engaged in combat. Consider what could be done for social spending and rebuilding aging infrastructure if the military-industrial complex could be reined in to levels sufficient just for our defense and not for open-ended wars of aggression with over a 1,000 military bases around the world.
The Columbia Journalist Review added up the total base budget and hidden costs for military spending for FY 2014. The total comes to $1.6 trillion. Both Democrats and Republicans never fight to reign in these escalating costs.
When it comes to the needs of ordinary citizens, neither party makes a difference.
“How good is the insurance thus obtained? Not perfect: despite subsidies, policies are still hard for some to afford, and deductibles and co-pays can be onerous.”
For those who can least afford it, those inadequate subsidies are serious. The for profit middlemen (insurance companies) is unnecessary and adds substantially to the cost of healthcare. Recently there have been mergers between large Health Insurers, hefty premium increases and Wall Street buying up generics as investment vehicles charging unconscionable price increases- all boding unfavorably to the long-term success of Obamacare.
Democrats silently agree to all the increase in military spending so they don’t appear as wimps on defense and rationalize it by protecting our armed forces once engaged in combat. Consider what could be done for social spending and rebuilding aging infrastructure if the military-industrial complex could be reined in to levels sufficient just for our defense and not for open-ended wars of aggression with over a 1,000 military bases around the world.
The Columbia Journalist Review added up the total base budget and hidden costs for military spending for FY 2014. The total comes to $1.6 trillion. Both Democrats and Republicans never fight to reign in these escalating costs.
When it comes to the needs of ordinary citizens, neither party makes a difference.
174
Paul, The consolidation among health insurers that you mention has been going on for decades, aided by the The McCarran–Ferguson Act of 1945, that exempts insurance companies from most federal regulation, including federal antitrust laws to some extent. http://tinyurl.com/nf4u33r
As a result, two or three health insurers now dominate every major market in the country. And more big mergers are under consideration. http://tinyurl.com/ovztt33
As a result, two or three health insurers now dominate every major market in the country. And more big mergers are under consideration. http://tinyurl.com/ovztt33
59
As a physician whose clinic treats a large number of ACA-insured patients, I have to disagree with Mr. Cohen. For all ACA's frustrations (in particular, dealing with a dozen different insurers with widely varying, sometimes mean and obstructive requirements to get tests and procedures authorized) it has resulted, over and over again, in my patients getting those tests and procedures done: MRI scans, treatment by pain specialists, and procedures ranging from injections into arthritic joints through cancer surgery, open-heart surgery and brain surgery (a young adult patient of mine with congenital aortic stenosis had his aortic valve replaced, relieving him from disabling chest pain and the certainty of early death in a few more years; another patient with hydrocephalus, water on his brain, had replacement of a failing shunt to drain the fluid, also saving him from great discomfort and early death).
You say, Mr. Cohen, "When it comes to the needs of ordinary citizens, neither party makes a difference." On the contrary, the two patients I've cited are indeed ordinary citizens (I could have named many, many more) for whom Obamacare, a primarily Democratic-party achievement but built on Republican Mitt Romney's original plan, has made a profound difference.
You say, Mr. Cohen, "When it comes to the needs of ordinary citizens, neither party makes a difference." On the contrary, the two patients I've cited are indeed ordinary citizens (I could have named many, many more) for whom Obamacare, a primarily Democratic-party achievement but built on Republican Mitt Romney's original plan, has made a profound difference.
9
"Democrats silently agree to all the increase in military spending so they don’t appear as wimps on defense" Nooo - Democrats agree on defense spending because it represents jobs - that's why you'll never-ever-ever see a Democrat legislator vote for a military base closure or against a weapon development program centered. in their state. Often in opposition to Defense Department proposals which seek to close bases. Just as senator Sanders opposes gun control measures because guns are very popular in Vermont - some action may be noble but they are also political suicide
1
PK writes, "The point is that from the point of view of the Republican base, covering the uninsured, or helping the unlucky in general, isn’t a feature, it’s a bug."
He could have added that the Republican base is not simply averse to helping the poor, those on the margins of society; that base actually DESPISES the poor, and those who struggle, such as immigrants newly arrived.
I used to think this was racism, pure and simple. I'm not so sure any more. (Look at how high Ben Carson stands in the polls among conservatives.) This hatred derives from fear of economic and status competition. Take a white family that has struggled to pull itself up, and has achieved a precarious hold on the middle class. They fear a challenge from below, a flood of poor and immigrants taking their jobs, corrupting their values, and edging them out of their once-dominant place is society The government has aided and abetted these challengers, as they see it, while forsaking them.
In this, we see all the elements of Tea Party thinking – hatred of government, and hatred of "others," especially immigrants. It is the same thinking that fuels fundamentalist movements everywhere. The world, it's changing, and fast, and many folks don't like it.
He could have added that the Republican base is not simply averse to helping the poor, those on the margins of society; that base actually DESPISES the poor, and those who struggle, such as immigrants newly arrived.
I used to think this was racism, pure and simple. I'm not so sure any more. (Look at how high Ben Carson stands in the polls among conservatives.) This hatred derives from fear of economic and status competition. Take a white family that has struggled to pull itself up, and has achieved a precarious hold on the middle class. They fear a challenge from below, a flood of poor and immigrants taking their jobs, corrupting their values, and edging them out of their once-dominant place is society The government has aided and abetted these challengers, as they see it, while forsaking them.
In this, we see all the elements of Tea Party thinking – hatred of government, and hatred of "others," especially immigrants. It is the same thinking that fuels fundamentalist movements everywhere. The world, it's changing, and fast, and many folks don't like it.
493
It's not just racism, it's a predictable downward spiraling of an ideology. You can refer to either one of the most prominent, destructive and failed ideological movements of the 20th century in that regard.
Carson's ignorant expressions of right wing dogma match Huckabee's spewing, so why is Carson up and the Huckster down? It's because Carson is, to the wing-dingy evangelical crowd, "One of the Good Ones".
The irony should be apparent -- Republicans point to Carson as Proof that they aren't racist because he's black, but the reason he gets more support is he's a rare exception -- "Not One of the Bad Ones."
In the endless evangelical tent revival, Carson's value is he's a ideologically entertaining Convert from Those Types.
So yes, in this case, it's racism.
Carson's ignorant expressions of right wing dogma match Huckabee's spewing, so why is Carson up and the Huckster down? It's because Carson is, to the wing-dingy evangelical crowd, "One of the Good Ones".
The irony should be apparent -- Republicans point to Carson as Proof that they aren't racist because he's black, but the reason he gets more support is he's a rare exception -- "Not One of the Bad Ones."
In the endless evangelical tent revival, Carson's value is he's a ideologically entertaining Convert from Those Types.
So yes, in this case, it's racism.
7
Immigrants should be welcomed and both helped and encouraged to assimilate into our culture. That is what built this country.
Immigrants also should come here only legally and with the full intention of assimilating. There is a limit to how many can be accommodated in any one year, however, and immigration needs to be a controlled process in order to accomplish its purpose. Uncontrolled, chaotic mass migration cannot work.
That said, we perhaps should consider raising our immigration quota.
Immigrants also should come here only legally and with the full intention of assimilating. There is a limit to how many can be accommodated in any one year, however, and immigration needs to be a controlled process in order to accomplish its purpose. Uncontrolled, chaotic mass migration cannot work.
That said, we perhaps should consider raising our immigration quota.
1
While there's a definite feeling among the lower-middle-class against the government, there is something basic as well. I live in a small rural village upstate. The economy here is minimal. A few farms, a few small businesses. The locals often are very right wing, very supportive of the Tea Party. They are usually very good, hard working people, so it seems odd that they would be opposed to those so close to them economically. The reason is welfare. They see themselves working so hard to run a small business and raise a family, and getting by, when they see so many who don't work, who get so much in welfare, they are resentful. And while the jobs are quite limited here, even if someone wanted a job, which many do, they find that it doesn't pay as well as the welfare system. No sane person would take that job.
A good policy for any future Democratic administration and Congress would be to cut taxes on this group of people, so they would be able to take more income home. They'd get to feel that the government did something for them (for once).
A good policy for any future Democratic administration and Congress would be to cut taxes on this group of people, so they would be able to take more income home. They'd get to feel that the government did something for them (for once).
4
If lived in a world where nobody got sick, everyone had access to the resources they need at the time they need it, and a perfect free market had no barriers to entry or exit, you could be a Republican. That is, provided you were a white male.
Romney was the first to turn the Heritage Foundation concept of private insurance based universal health care into a practical reality. For that he deserves congratulations, even if he is in no position to accept them. But I could never vote for him as a Presidential candidate. He made so many wacky promises to the wingnut element of his party (which seems to be most of them these days) that I was afraid he was going to keep some of them.
Romney was the first to turn the Heritage Foundation concept of private insurance based universal health care into a practical reality. For that he deserves congratulations, even if he is in no position to accept them. But I could never vote for him as a Presidential candidate. He made so many wacky promises to the wingnut element of his party (which seems to be most of them these days) that I was afraid he was going to keep some of them.
146
The Republican party just gets worse and worse.
Given today's Republican party, it's hard to fathom that as a Republican, Romney started the Massachusetts health plan.
And that today, states actively reject free help for poor people via Medicaid expansion.
During the last elections. Republicans were called the part of the stupid and crazy.
Today's version--the party of the cruel and unusual.
Given today's Republican party, it's hard to fathom that as a Republican, Romney started the Massachusetts health plan.
And that today, states actively reject free help for poor people via Medicaid expansion.
During the last elections. Republicans were called the part of the stupid and crazy.
Today's version--the party of the cruel and unusual.
324
Demented!
1
@Siobahn
Actually it wan’t Romney who devised the idea of the Massachusetts health plan.
Heritage Action, the Heritage Foundation’s political arm came up with the following plan in 1989: “Assuring Affordable Health Care for all Americans.”
1) All citizens should be guaranteed universal access to affordable health care.
2) Mandate ALL households to obtain adequate insurance
http://americablog.com/2013/10/original-1989-document-heritage-foundatio...
The Koch Brothers were behind this mandated ACA to counter any single payer government program. They wanted individuals to take personal responsibility for their health care costs and not end up with a “government hand out program of entitlement.”
Oh the law of unintended consequences! No wonder the Kochs have worked so hard to undo Obamacare!
Next step under POTUS HRC or Sanders, we will FINALLY get HRC’s universal health care plan she attempted to kickstart in the early 1990s.
NOW, if ONLY we progressives get off our collective backsides and actually VOTE in all elections, yes we CAN get that final single payer system!
Actually it wan’t Romney who devised the idea of the Massachusetts health plan.
Heritage Action, the Heritage Foundation’s political arm came up with the following plan in 1989: “Assuring Affordable Health Care for all Americans.”
1) All citizens should be guaranteed universal access to affordable health care.
2) Mandate ALL households to obtain adequate insurance
http://americablog.com/2013/10/original-1989-document-heritage-foundatio...
The Koch Brothers were behind this mandated ACA to counter any single payer government program. They wanted individuals to take personal responsibility for their health care costs and not end up with a “government hand out program of entitlement.”
Oh the law of unintended consequences! No wonder the Kochs have worked so hard to undo Obamacare!
Next step under POTUS HRC or Sanders, we will FINALLY get HRC’s universal health care plan she attempted to kickstart in the early 1990s.
NOW, if ONLY we progressives get off our collective backsides and actually VOTE in all elections, yes we CAN get that final single payer system!
7
I'm tired of comments scolding for not voting. Who picks the nominees we have to choose from? Which nominee is going to push single payer, or even a public option, or even some regulation of insurance and drug prices? These are off the table. There is no political mechanism to realize these goals in the US. So telling us to vote, while so worthy, will only avert disaster, but not bring us to 20th c standards in h/c systems.
A country that tolerates citizens united and a h/c system supporting profits, and leaving out millions, isn't going to solve it's problems just by voting.
A country that tolerates citizens united and a h/c system supporting profits, and leaving out millions, isn't going to solve it's problems just by voting.
Meanwhile, Mitt's running mate Paul Ryan wants to privatize Medicare, as well as getting rid of Obamacare and tearing the rest of the social safety net to shreds. But Joe Biden has just come to his defense, saying that Ryan is "a good guy" with whom Democrats should be eager to cooperate.
And therein lies the problem. The DNC leadership has veered so far right that it is either reduced to shooting diseased GOP fish in a barrel, or pretending that bipartisanship is still a good thing. It's reduced to defending a clunky insurance program that benefits only some of the people some of the time.
Yes, the expansion of Medicaid to some of the working poor is to be applauded. But the fact remains that at least 30 million of us remain uninsured or underinsured. Thousands of people are still dying because they can't afford to see a doctor.
Medicare for All (John Conyers' HR 676) is getting well-deserved new attention through the presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders. Not only would it cover everybody from cradle to grave with medical, dental, mental health care and drug therapies, it would actually save as much as a trillion dollars a year. From "consumers" who must now enter a fraught health care lottery every year in order to enrich the increasingly consolidated insurance industry, we'd be able join the rest of the civilized world in defining health care as a basic human right.
Forget about freeing Romney. How about freeing 330 million Americans via Medicare for All?
And therein lies the problem. The DNC leadership has veered so far right that it is either reduced to shooting diseased GOP fish in a barrel, or pretending that bipartisanship is still a good thing. It's reduced to defending a clunky insurance program that benefits only some of the people some of the time.
Yes, the expansion of Medicaid to some of the working poor is to be applauded. But the fact remains that at least 30 million of us remain uninsured or underinsured. Thousands of people are still dying because they can't afford to see a doctor.
Medicare for All (John Conyers' HR 676) is getting well-deserved new attention through the presidential campaign of Bernie Sanders. Not only would it cover everybody from cradle to grave with medical, dental, mental health care and drug therapies, it would actually save as much as a trillion dollars a year. From "consumers" who must now enter a fraught health care lottery every year in order to enrich the increasingly consolidated insurance industry, we'd be able join the rest of the civilized world in defining health care as a basic human right.
Forget about freeing Romney. How about freeing 330 million Americans via Medicare for All?
1045
Karen, although Bernie Sanders truly represents the only Jesus Christ like figure in the entire current presidential campaign exemplified by his authentic concern for all Americans & his focus on restoring the American dream to the empty rhetoric that passes for debate, he is standing alone in an island of sanity. His idea of a single payer represents an intelligent choice if the American public were as educated & knowledgeable as their European counterparts, although we both know that is a fatuous argument. The reality is that Congress just passed a bill in April supported by both the GOP majority, Democratic minority & signed into law by President Obama, which increased the out of pocket expenses for Medicare Part B recipients in order to guarantee that doctors were being fairly reimbursed for their services. Providing free Medicare for all in a society that encourages people to frequent all you can eat buffets until they burst out of their stretch polyester athletic suits, drive everywhere instead of walk or bike & sit on their couches watching mindless TV or fiddle compulsively with their hand held gadgets is going to need tremendous amounts of medical care. Instead, the public should be encouraged to get off their largess derrieres, walk or bike to school or work & maintain a garden instead of eating convenience food filled with toxic poisons guaranteeing an early death.
3
@Ms. Garcia,
Perhaps I am the eternal optimist (My colleagues say that I am sure there is a pony underneath that pile of manure--so I just keep digging.) but can’t we at least hope that Ryan might grow up from the days of Ayn Rand and possibly change?
The two parties MUST work together to achieve mature legislation and as long as we have gerrymandered districts in the House, compromise HAS to be on the table. Vice President Biden is VERY focused on healthcare now that he has only a year left...and the constant memory of the recent death of his son Beau and that brain tumor that took him so young...may be a great force as VP Biden’s last great hurrah.
Perhaps I am the eternal optimist (My colleagues say that I am sure there is a pony underneath that pile of manure--so I just keep digging.) but can’t we at least hope that Ryan might grow up from the days of Ayn Rand and possibly change?
The two parties MUST work together to achieve mature legislation and as long as we have gerrymandered districts in the House, compromise HAS to be on the table. Vice President Biden is VERY focused on healthcare now that he has only a year left...and the constant memory of the recent death of his son Beau and that brain tumor that took him so young...may be a great force as VP Biden’s last great hurrah.
3
Let us continue to be optimistic about the future. As an example of things getting better, we might recall this:
When the Nazis came to Sigmund Freud's home in Vienna to destroy his library, they piled his books in the street and lit them on fire. Freud looked at his burning books, and remarked:
"Civilization has advanced. A hundred years ago, they would have burned me."
When the Nazis came to Sigmund Freud's home in Vienna to destroy his library, they piled his books in the street and lit them on fire. Freud looked at his burning books, and remarked:
"Civilization has advanced. A hundred years ago, they would have burned me."
7
We would feel more sorry for Mittens had he not been caught on video making his 47% remark, betraying his prejudices and life motivations/cynicism in remarks to the donor class which fit so well with the comments from Madame Range Rover as she tried to get to one of his Hamptons functions dismissing we commoners:
" I don’t think the common person is getting it. Nobody understands why Obama is hurting them. My college kid, the baby sitters, the nails ladies — everybody who’s got the right to vote — they don’t understand what’s going on. I just think if you’re lower income — one, you’re not as educated; two, they don’t understand how it works, they don’t understand how the systems work, they don’t understand the impact. "
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/09/madam_range_rover_and_the_nails_ladies/
Besides, history often has a sense of humor, since not only is Romney having to deny his signature achievement (based on common sense, logic and reality) but the whole thing is originally a Heritage Foundation plan from 1989:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/08/republicans-supported-obamacare-...
supported by Rick Santorum, Newtie Gingrich, Bush 43, Bob Dole, Orrin Hatch, and on and on.
Romney had the unfortunate problem of believing GOP'ers who put people like the House Freedumb Caucus into office want to be led anywhere - that they are concerned with anything except taking things apart, a motivation that Romney is on video pandering to.
" I don’t think the common person is getting it. Nobody understands why Obama is hurting them. My college kid, the baby sitters, the nails ladies — everybody who’s got the right to vote — they don’t understand what’s going on. I just think if you’re lower income — one, you’re not as educated; two, they don’t understand how it works, they don’t understand how the systems work, they don’t understand the impact. "
http://www.salon.com/2012/07/09/madam_range_rover_and_the_nails_ladies/
Besides, history often has a sense of humor, since not only is Romney having to deny his signature achievement (based on common sense, logic and reality) but the whole thing is originally a Heritage Foundation plan from 1989:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/08/republicans-supported-obamacare-...
supported by Rick Santorum, Newtie Gingrich, Bush 43, Bob Dole, Orrin Hatch, and on and on.
Romney had the unfortunate problem of believing GOP'ers who put people like the House Freedumb Caucus into office want to be led anywhere - that they are concerned with anything except taking things apart, a motivation that Romney is on video pandering to.
326
R, Republicans happened to entertain a notion that they are "Entitled to Occupy the White House Forever!" Clinton Presidency was an aberration they thought. 'And now Obama? Who put a black man there? What's going on?'
As President Obama is black, his father is from Kenya & went back to Kenya, we have got to BELIEVE he was born in Kenya. He also has to be at least a secret Muslim with radical socialist ideas. He couldn't fully accept USA is HIS country. Such thoughts were boiling in them. Then there were some white Democrats who secretly enjoyed all the Republican rage. And the Tea Party was created to agitate, to obstruct Obama at every step, no matter what they are. Obama's natural disengagement & a certain disdain for them didn't help. He could have been more endearing & enduring of their scorn & racist prejudice, got his hands dirty, so to speak; after all we elected him to be our CEO with enormous perks, albeit less powerful as per the constitution.
As President Obama is black, his father is from Kenya & went back to Kenya, we have got to BELIEVE he was born in Kenya. He also has to be at least a secret Muslim with radical socialist ideas. He couldn't fully accept USA is HIS country. Such thoughts were boiling in them. Then there were some white Democrats who secretly enjoyed all the Republican rage. And the Tea Party was created to agitate, to obstruct Obama at every step, no matter what they are. Obama's natural disengagement & a certain disdain for them didn't help. He could have been more endearing & enduring of their scorn & racist prejudice, got his hands dirty, so to speak; after all we elected him to be our CEO with enormous perks, albeit less powerful as per the constitution.
2
Can i say-- I'm so tired of the stupid nicknames for Romney.
"Delusions of Failure" PK trumpeted in a recent blog post, calling out Republicans for their unrelenting attacks on Obamacare. http://nyti.ms/1S2qquI
"Delusions of Success" is the counterpart among Democrats. Access to Medicaid has increased, but as we have found out, that is not the same as access to medical care, especially in rural parts of the country. Medicaid expansion has been a cruel, empty promise for many of the poor.
Insurance rates are going up in 2016, PK reminds us, and they will continue to go up, probably at an increasing rate, industry-watchers say.
What's more, ACA is a means-tested program. It takes from the rich and gives to the poor. Means-tested programs don't have a good record in this country. That is its achilles heel, and why it will remain subject to unrelenting attack, until one day it finally succumbs to Republican propaganda.
Medicare-for-all, phased in over a few years, is the only fair and durable solution, It will not only give everyone similar coverage, but also similar access to health care where available. Doctors will not be able to opt out.
I know, I know, ACA was the best we could get under the circumstances. But that is no reason to celebrate such a flawed compromise, nor is it an excuse to abandon the goal of Medicare-for-all.
"Delusions of Success" is the counterpart among Democrats. Access to Medicaid has increased, but as we have found out, that is not the same as access to medical care, especially in rural parts of the country. Medicaid expansion has been a cruel, empty promise for many of the poor.
Insurance rates are going up in 2016, PK reminds us, and they will continue to go up, probably at an increasing rate, industry-watchers say.
What's more, ACA is a means-tested program. It takes from the rich and gives to the poor. Means-tested programs don't have a good record in this country. That is its achilles heel, and why it will remain subject to unrelenting attack, until one day it finally succumbs to Republican propaganda.
Medicare-for-all, phased in over a few years, is the only fair and durable solution, It will not only give everyone similar coverage, but also similar access to health care where available. Doctors will not be able to opt out.
I know, I know, ACA was the best we could get under the circumstances. But that is no reason to celebrate such a flawed compromise, nor is it an excuse to abandon the goal of Medicare-for-all.
559
ACA is a HUGE first step on the way to Medicare-for-all and it should be celebrated as such. The Democrats should be taking credit and trumpeting its successes in their campaigns in that context. And when confronted with the "socialism" nonsense they should be pointing to the good sense of our neighbors to the north.
14
Pretty much nothing in America takes from the rich. The rich rule under the Golden Rule, that is, he has the gold, rules. The largest welfare from the federal government is corporate welfare (see CATO's web site for specific data.) The rich send excess funds overseas to hidden accounts. The rich do not even pay their fair share of Social Security taxes, a basic expense for everyone else. The rich lobby exceptions to regulations so they can escape taxes (see Forbes article on the 25 largest companies in the US who pay no taxes.) Sorry, your bias just does not hold water. Ron, there are just so many reasons you are simply wrong.
5
I fully agree, Mr. Cohen, A good start in that direction might be for Congress to allow all citizens to join the excellent group plan that is now available to their own family members and to all federal employees. Why not do so, and make all premiums fully tax deductible for individual households as they are now only for employers?
Ask your senators or representatives, of either party, that question and you will be met with silence. At least I have been.
Ask your senators or representatives, of either party, that question and you will be met with silence. At least I have been.
1
Mitt would be a terrible choice
And yet he spoke with a sane voice,
More than a tad greedy
Nothing for the needy,
For tax cuts worth one more Rolls Royce.
Compared to this crew, he looms tall,
Climate deniers filled with gall,
A hair raising bunch
And it is my hunch
Doomed to dire defeat come next fall!
And yet he spoke with a sane voice,
More than a tad greedy
Nothing for the needy,
For tax cuts worth one more Rolls Royce.
Compared to this crew, he looms tall,
Climate deniers filled with gall,
A hair raising bunch
And it is my hunch
Doomed to dire defeat come next fall!
141
Don't be so sure. The party of the geeky may just find a way to lose an "unlosable" election.
There's no telling their(/"our") inventiveness ;-)
There's no telling their(/"our") inventiveness ;-)
2
"Doomed to dire defeat come next fall!"
I hope you are right but so fear the chance you may be wrong.
I hope you are right but so fear the chance you may be wrong.
1
"More than a 'tad' greedy."
No, Larry, with great respect. He made a lot of money. But he is an exceptionally charitable man. If he were greedy, tad or even less so, he could have been still much richer. His tax rates have been too low, because he donated too much to charity. With all his legal deductions & a federal rate of, I'm guessing, around 20%, he could have accumulated possibly 50% more wealth. He chose to give a lot away for whatever charity he chose.
I admire such rich folks, almost as much as Bill Gates & not far from Warren Buffett. Buffett also want other rich pay a lot more in taxes. Mitt can't say that, which is blasphemy for a Republican, since the Reagan revolution. Prior to that Republicans were for VERY HIGH taxes, including, strangely enough Ronald Reagan who drastically raised California's State tax, doubling tax revenue in 8 yrs of his administration! (There maybe something in CA water, the same "chemical" in Nordic waters?)
If Mitt hadn't chosen Ayn Randian Ryan as his running mate I wouldn't have been so apprehensive in 2012. I never worried about an election as much as I did in 2012, solely because of Paul Ryan. I ought to have in 1980, but sadly didn't.
No, Larry, with great respect. He made a lot of money. But he is an exceptionally charitable man. If he were greedy, tad or even less so, he could have been still much richer. His tax rates have been too low, because he donated too much to charity. With all his legal deductions & a federal rate of, I'm guessing, around 20%, he could have accumulated possibly 50% more wealth. He chose to give a lot away for whatever charity he chose.
I admire such rich folks, almost as much as Bill Gates & not far from Warren Buffett. Buffett also want other rich pay a lot more in taxes. Mitt can't say that, which is blasphemy for a Republican, since the Reagan revolution. Prior to that Republicans were for VERY HIGH taxes, including, strangely enough Ronald Reagan who drastically raised California's State tax, doubling tax revenue in 8 yrs of his administration! (There maybe something in CA water, the same "chemical" in Nordic waters?)
If Mitt hadn't chosen Ayn Randian Ryan as his running mate I wouldn't have been so apprehensive in 2012. I never worried about an election as much as I did in 2012, solely because of Paul Ryan. I ought to have in 1980, but sadly didn't.
3
I've been way past Romney for a few years now. He still matters? More germane to the discussion of what to do now that we are post-Obamacare and know it works, is Bernie Sanders' plan to extend Medicare to all. Healthcare is a necessity and we know - we've always known - that having tens of millions of uninsured not only means lives cut short way too soon, but a financial drag on all of us. Obamacare has shown those among us who were skeptical that this can and should be done. Now, we need to find a way to include those who've been on the outside looking in: the uninsured in the red states.
While Ben Bernanke has indeed been left by his party, so have many others we've not heard from in a while. Those would be former Governor Jon Huntsman, Buddy Roemer and many others whom the GOP also left. It doesn't make them any less Republican, just Republicans without a home for now. When the party is done imploding, it will need leadership, especially after Trump is done.
Hopefully, before that happens, Democrats will have cleaned house and the balance between progressives and liberals will have been calibrated. It is also my hope that the DNC will finally get things together and get busy with a Southern Strategy. The party needs to retake the House of Representatives. Whichever Democrat wins the presidency will need a lot of support from Democrats who are ready to make up for 4 years of congressional inactivity. It's time to put the GOP back where it belongs: in the opposition.
While Ben Bernanke has indeed been left by his party, so have many others we've not heard from in a while. Those would be former Governor Jon Huntsman, Buddy Roemer and many others whom the GOP also left. It doesn't make them any less Republican, just Republicans without a home for now. When the party is done imploding, it will need leadership, especially after Trump is done.
Hopefully, before that happens, Democrats will have cleaned house and the balance between progressives and liberals will have been calibrated. It is also my hope that the DNC will finally get things together and get busy with a Southern Strategy. The party needs to retake the House of Representatives. Whichever Democrat wins the presidency will need a lot of support from Democrats who are ready to make up for 4 years of congressional inactivity. It's time to put the GOP back where it belongs: in the opposition.
309
It's been amazing to see how many variations on the same themes can be revisited just so to avoid a certain topic of conversation. I forget, but was Barack Obama covered as little at this point during the 07 primary? At what point was his platform compared to Hillary's? It's a wonder voters were able to make up their minds so decisively without any helpful information from the mainstream media...
I keep hoping certain people and organizations will finally do the right thing. Oh, well!
www.rimaregas.com
I keep hoping certain people and organizations will finally do the right thing. Oh, well!
www.rimaregas.com
55
A lot more tempered, this time, Rima. I like that.
It may not happen but my hope is that both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders announce that either wins the Primary, they would pick Martin O'Malley as their running mate, in the likely event O'Malley is not the winner
It may not happen but my hope is that both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders announce that either wins the Primary, they would pick Martin O'Malley as their running mate, in the likely event O'Malley is not the winner
3
Rima,
Checking reality once in a wile is a wonderful thing!
Take a look at the Democrats, about the only things that the various factions can agree on is that they want control of the country and they want the government to do more for them (for free)!
The things they can't agree on are legion, starting with who should run for President. Those commenting here want Bernie Sanders. The NYT and every Democrat Party Offical want Ms. Clinton, who they believe can actually win the election. Then there is the subject of immigration where a majority of elected Democrats are in favor of open borders (Bernie Sanders excluded) while a majority of Those who vote Democrat and work for a living are far less in favor of the concept. On the subject of the place of the U.S. In the world there is a bitter division within the Obama Administration as well as the various party factions over what as well as how much we should do. Even the President's signature program the ACA is "touted" by some Democrats while it is bitterly attacked by others.
In short Democrats are "United" only by a desire to hold on to the Presidency and not even on the means to accomplish that!
Checking reality once in a wile is a wonderful thing!
Take a look at the Democrats, about the only things that the various factions can agree on is that they want control of the country and they want the government to do more for them (for free)!
The things they can't agree on are legion, starting with who should run for President. Those commenting here want Bernie Sanders. The NYT and every Democrat Party Offical want Ms. Clinton, who they believe can actually win the election. Then there is the subject of immigration where a majority of elected Democrats are in favor of open borders (Bernie Sanders excluded) while a majority of Those who vote Democrat and work for a living are far less in favor of the concept. On the subject of the place of the U.S. In the world there is a bitter division within the Obama Administration as well as the various party factions over what as well as how much we should do. Even the President's signature program the ACA is "touted" by some Democrats while it is bitterly attacked by others.
In short Democrats are "United" only by a desire to hold on to the Presidency and not even on the means to accomplish that!
4