Krugman Advocates for DEATH & TAXES

Paul Krugman has affirmatively stated that the solution to our financial debacle involves a combination of Death Panels and Sales Taxes.

Well, at least he's honest.

RUTH MARCUS, WASHINGTON POST: Right now, 75 percent of people believe you could balance the budget without touching Medicare or Social Security; 75 percent of people believe that you can balance the budget without raising taxes. Well, you could, but it would be extraordinarily painful.

People need to get a little bit of reality therapy. There's going to be another dose coming on Wednesday when another group is going to submit their recommendations, very concrete recommendations about how to do it. That's the conversation we need to have before we start picking apart solutions.

PAUL KRUGMAN, NEW YORK TIMES: If they were going to do reality therapy, they should have said, OK, look, Medicare is going to have to decide what it's going to pay for. And at least for starters, it's going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all. In other words, it should have endorsed the panel that was part of the health care reform.

If it's not even -- if the commission isn't even brave enough to take on the death panels people, then it's doing no good at all. It's not educating the public. It's not telling people about the kinds of choices that need to be made.

A few minutes later:

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, HOST: But what is going to happen? I mean, are you clear on where a compromise is going to be? It's got to be discussed before the end of the year, no?

KRUGMAN: No. Some years down the pike, we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes. It's going to be that we're actually going to take Medicare under control, and we're going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT. But it's not going to happen now...

Paul Krugman Recommends 'Death Panels' to Help Balance Budget | NewsBusters.org

 

Yeah team. Krauthammer mentioned a VAT and the left called him a "whacko"

 

It's well known, amongst people who know their economic stuff, that Keynesians are closet eugenicists.

 

Indeed.

Tax people throughout their careers for to fund health care for the aged; and then deny them care when they retire.

How lovely.

The Gubmint Overlords might as well make smoking and asbestos underwear cumpulsory.

 

hey! that's the MRC and you know they have a 'reputation' for inaccuracy ...what? Krugman says it? ( and he is serious, I just watched it) well, guess mrc is right....



guess palin was just blowing idiot smoke...but when krugman bloviates, its just hey he's telling it like it is and has to be.......


the VAT has been a 'silent' topic in the dem caucus for a while now, they see it as their last refuge to continue to drain us. They don't have the horses now to push it thx to nancy and the O, thank god.

 

Nice example of selective editing.

 

It's a verbatim transcription of the statements in the video.

What a sad attempt at obfuscation, ravi.

 

It would explain why Obama has Eugenicists as his closest advisers

 

Whatever the fuck you do, don't count the free market, don't count having people pay for medicine and health care out of pocket as a way to contain costs, that's too darn radical

 

Indeed. Dr. Berwick is Dr. Death Panel.

Today’s individual health care processes are designed to respond to the acute needs of individual patients, rather than to anticipate and shape patterns of care for important subgroups. An integrator would act differently, assigning much more value and many more resources, for example, to the monitoring and interception of early signs of deterioration among the 100 CHF patients in a doctor’s panel or the 1,000 CHF patients who used the hospital last year.

.....

Perhaps the most powerful needed change is to disrupt the dynamics of supply-driven care and instead to match supply better to underlying needs. An integrator would approach new technologies and capital investments with skepticism and require that a strong burden of proof of value lie with the proponent. Operating budgets would encourage thinking across boundaries. An integrator would ask, "Might two additional home outreach nurses be better for the Triple Aim than another cardiologist?" Capital budgets would be informed by the insights of Fisher and Wennberg, and good integrators would encourage through incentives—and, if needed, regulations—strict limits on the growth of facilities....

The Triple Aim: Care, Health, And Cost -- Berwick et al. 27 (3): 759 -- Health Affairs


Berwick is much more concerned with rationing supply than ensuring a climate which encourages individual care.