Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    Death Panels and Sales Taxes

    I said something deliberately provocative on This Week, so I think I’d better clarify what I meant (which I did on the show, but it can’t hurt to say it again.)

    So, what I said is that the eventual resolution of the deficit problem both will and should rely on “death panels and sales taxes”. What I meant is that

    (a) health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care

    (b) we’ll need more revenue — several percent of GDP — which might most plausibly come from a value-added tax

    And if we do those two things, we’re most of the way toward a sustainable budget.

    By the way, I’ve said this before.

    Now, you may declare that this is politically impossible. But medical costs must be controlled somehow, or nothing works. And is a modest VAT really so much more implausible than ending the mortgage interest deduction?

    So that’s my plan. And I believe that some day — maybe in the first Chelsea Clinton administration — it will actually happen.

     http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/death-panels-and-sales-taxes/

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    Paul Krugman, the former consultant to Enron.

    Nobel Prizes given to leftists for being leftists are equivalent to kids' soccer "Participation" trophies....

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    Death Panels and Sales Taxes

    I said something deliberately provocative on This Week, so I think I’d better clarify what I meant (which I did on the show, but it can’t hurt to say it again.)

    So, what I said is that the eventual resolution of the deficit problem both will and should rely on “death panels and sales taxes”. What I meant is that

    (a) health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care

    (b) we’ll need more revenue — several percent of GDP — which might most plausibly come from a value-added tax

    And if we do those two things, we’re most of the way toward a sustainable budget.

    By the way, I’ve said this before.

    Now, you may declare that this is politically impossible. But medical costs must be controlled somehow, or nothing works. And is a modest VAT really so much more implausible than ending the mortgage interest deduction?

    So that’s my plan. And I believe that some day — maybe in the first Chelsea Clinton administration — it will actually happen.

     http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/death-panels-and-sales-taxes/




    So, the government determines "medical effectiveness".

    And, that's not a "death panel"?

     

    Oh, and while he's at it, Krugman makes another plug for big government by saying that we need to raise more taxes, or we will start killing people by determining that we can't afford the level of "medical effectiveness"  they need.

    Face it, liberals, even if you had the best of intentions by supporting Obamacare, you've been had.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from jackbu. Show jackbu's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    I have not heard Sarah Palin's name mentioned in a long time.  I wonder if ms still thinks that she will run for President?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    Ouchie....ya really got me with that one...



    Sorry.

     

     

     

     

    I wasn't sure if, before jumping up in down in glee at supposedly catching a liberal in whatever you think you caught him in, you and Gregin realized that the bit Gregin picked up from skeeter20, which skeeter grabbed from Breitbart (surprise there), was from February 5, 2013 - and was about something that he said the prior week.

     

    5 Feb 2013

    "Nobel Prize winning “economist” Paul Krugman spoke at Sixth & I Historic Synagogue in Washington, D.C. last week."

     

     

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/04/Krugman-Death-panels-and-sales-taxes-is-how-we-do-this


    Pay attention to that bolded number. It will be important where we get to the "clarification" business you and gregin were cackling about.

     

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    Didn't take llong for the back peddle.  So its, "what I realy meant was . . ." rather than the bus.  Excellent

     

    Yeah us libs, we're dirty sneeky bunch, Greg. Pinkie, give him a high five.

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    No, no Greg...it's only backpedaling when a conservative clarifies a statement. You must get these rules straight!

     

    Whoa. Waiiiiit a sec. Now, look at the bolded bit. I have to suspect Username cleverly omitted it when he linked the following.

     

    November 14, 2010, 12:40 pm 266 Comments

    Death Panels and Sales Taxes

     

    I said something deliberately provocative on This Week, so I think I’d better clarify what I meant (which I did on the show, but it can’t hurt to say it again.)

    So, what I said is that the eventual resolution of the deficit problem both will and should rely on “death panels and sales taxes”. What I meant is that

    (a) health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care

    (b) we’ll need more revenue — several percent of GDP — which might most plausibly come from a value-added tax

    And if we do those two things, we’re most of the way toward a sustainable budget.

    By the way, I’ve said this before.

    Now, you may declare that this is politically impossible. But medical costs must be controlled somehow, or nothing works. And is a modest VAT really so much more implausible than ending the mortgage interest deduction?

    So that’s my plan. And I believe that some day — maybe in the first Chelsea Clinton administration — it will actually happen.

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/death-panels-and-sales-taxes/             Get this: The supposed "backpedaling" you two were snickering at liberals about? That was 3 years BEFOREthe quote Gregin reposted.   Did he go back in time to do his backpedaling?   Maybe you should check your assumptions about the dirty liberals.

     

     




    Well, no, I didn't grab from Brietbart.  I wish I had.  Brietbart was one of the few people that would stand up to the bullies on the left.

    Look, I get you a Nobel Prize winning economist from the left saying we are going to have to insititute death panels  in order for Obamacare to work, and you still find a problem with it.

    You are beyond salvage.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName99. Show UserName99's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    Well, no, I didn't grab from Brietbart.  I wish I had.  Brietbart was one of the few people that would stand up to the bullies on the left.

     

    Look, I get you a Nobel Prize winning economist from the left saying we are going to have to insititute death panels  in order for Obamacare to work, and you still find a problem with it.

    You are beyond salvage.

     




    The difference is that Krugman's comment was a joke.  Palin's use the same term was no joke. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    (a) health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they’re willing to pay for — not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we’re willing to spend for extreme care

    Shorter Krugman: We're still going to have death panels, we're just not going to CALL them death panels. See how clever I am?

     

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: Uh oh. Paul Krugman, not Sarah Palin.

    Thank you. This mainly confirms my suspicions: There isn't mcuh of anything government can do to address health care costs, short of going single-payer.

     

    Mostly it just confirms your confirmation bias. The truth is that the healthcare industry, not being exempt from the laws of economics, will only become more efficient and less costly through genuine competition. That, and changing how allopathic doctors insist on treating the symptoms instead of the causes of disease but that's a topic for a different forum.

     

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share