The government is not an insurance company ...

[dblack]

Even if I had, I doubt I’d commit anything you post to memory.

Sure, sure. It's just that you're always screeching about me being a leftist when I'm clearly not. I guess it's something to do.

 

[Captain Caveman]

It is if you are wealthy or connected.

S&L bailouts
Bank bailouts
GM bailout
Chrsyler bailout
Hedge fund bailouts right now for Argentina

Bailouts save jobs, support key industries, boost investor confidence, and stabilize the economy.

Bailouts Explained: Key Concepts, Mechanisms, and Historical Cases

Explore bailouts in-depth: definition, key mechanisms, historical examples, and their impact on economic stability, industries, and employment.

www.investopedia.com

 

[dblack]

Bailouts save jobs, support key industries, boost investor confidence, and stabilize the economy.

And promote reliance on future bailouts. What a country!

 

[whitehall]

ThisIsMe, seeeee? What did I tell you?


.

YOU TOLD NOTHING

 

[g5000]

YOU TOLD NOTHING

You walked right into it.

 

[BackAgain]

Sure, sure. It's just that you're always screeching about me being a leftist when I'm clearly not. I guess it's something to do.

I’m not screeching at all. I’m just calling bullshit on you. You deserve it.

Be defensive about it on your own time.

Now, back to the actual topic (I hope you don’t mind).

The government is not an insurance company. And many actual conservatives don’t care for corporate bailouts upon the principled reason that we should pay more than mere lip service to capitalism (including companies going out of business) since conservatives are traditionally capitalists.

Are there other (social) considerations? Obviously. Bail-outs can help entire industries survive — to the benefit of all the workers.

The question thus comes down to whether a studious, blind allegiance to capitalism is worth the social cost. I can sympathize with American leaders who take that concern into account even if it makes them appear inconsistent.

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson.

 

[Billiejeens]

Paul Krugman is correct.

And you are not smart enough to explain how he is wrong.

Krugman has never once been right.
Documented.

 

[schmidlap]

We have not been capitalistic in decades.

We are a plutocracy.

.

Money has become an anti-democratic force in politics.

The challenge for the plutes is to convince the proles that their interests coincide.

 

[Billiejeens]

Republicans believe in bail-outs for the rich....which you just agreed is wrong.

Maybe you should quit voting Republican.

He's a nonparticipant
Retard.

 

[Zincwarrior]

AKA the people who need a bailout from time to time

Only the wealthy.

 

[jotathought]

Paul Krugman is correct.

And you are not smart enough to explain how he is wrong.

I would guess that he (and economists before him) were using this slogan to describe the lion's share of the federal budget dedicated to "social insurance" programs, such as Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and other social safety nets, as well as national defense, including the military.

Essentially, the reality of the budget to demonstrate that cutting government spending is politically and practically more complicated than it sounds, with popular and expensive provisions.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

I would guess that he (and economists before him) were using this slogan to describe the lion's share of the federal budget dedicated to "social insurance" programs, such as Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, and other social safety nets, as well as national defense, including the military.

Essentially, the reality of the budget to demonstrate that cutting government spending is politically and practically more complicated than it sounds, with popular and expensive provisions.

What Krugman is really getting at is that the purpose of a responsible government is to ensure our way of life....so that we don't have total anarchy and kill each other over the scraps on the table.

But the chaos, corruption, and incompetence of the Trump government is bringing this "insurance company" to an end.

 

[jotathought]

What Krugman is really getting at is that the purpose of a responsible government is to ensure our way of life....so that we don't have total anarchy and kill each other over the scraps on the table.

But the chaos, corruption, and incompetence of the Trump government is bringing this "insurance company" to an end.

That's not what Krugman meant by that phrase ..

Insurance Company With An Army Blogging​

Paul Krugman

A short piece on yours truly in Bloomberg Businessweek online, in which I learn that I’m a gnome. Also, that Jeff Sachs, whose analysis and motives become increasingly mysterious, thinks that I don’t pay enough attention to wasteful government spending. And that calls, I think, for a couple of reminders.

First, if we’re talking about current federal spending, outside defense — which isn’t part of this discussion — where is the major waste? As we need to remember now and then, the federal government is basically an insurance company with an army, and the insurance side isn’t bad. Nondefense spending is dominated by Social Security, which is highly efficient; Medicare, which could do better, but is more efficient than private insurance; and Medicaid, which is much more cost-effective than private insurance. I’m sure that if you look through nondefense discretionary spending you’ll find some waste, but no more than in any large organization.

More broadly, the US spends twice as much on health care as other advanced countries, with no better results — and that disparity is the result of private-sector, not public-sector, waste.

[Rest of blog entry removed - link included above]

 

[eagle7-31]

... and we need to stop pretending it should function as one.

For years socialists like Paul Krugman have been trying to sell the notion that government is "an insurance company with an army". He proclaims this as though it's a good thing. It's not.

Obamacare: Steal from the poor, give to the rich

Barack Obama, and most Democrats, have wanted government control of all health insurance for decades. They knew that wouldn’t fly, so they decided to stick their foot in the door with the falsely named Affordable Care Act. Obama and other Democ...

www.americanthinker.com

Not an insurance company by any means. Starting with the phony BO care.

 

[Dr. Phosphorous]

That's not what Krugman meant by that phrase ..

Actually, Krugman is saying the same thing that I said.

 

[jotathought]

Actually, Krugman is saying the same thing that I said.

Lol .. on the contrary .. he's wasn't using that phrase discussing a broad, philosophical claim about the purpose of government; rather, his main argument was about the composition and efficiency of federal spending, and was pushing back on the blanket statement often used -- "wasteful government spending."

 

[progressive hunter]

It is if you are wealthy or connected.

S&L bailouts
Bank bailouts
GM bailout
Chrsyler bailout
Hedge fund bailouts right now for Argentina

I cant find that anywhere in the constitution,,

 

[struth]

The shutdown has nothing to do with bailing out insurance companies.

.

Of course it does. The left wants to extend the Obama subs to them that are set to expire in Dec

 

[Dekster]

Obamacare really a lot of people's insurances because if you were on individual policies and then suddenly were part of a group you got rated for the group and then if you were not subsidized, then you paid even more. I mean great that the diabetic with one foot, and failing kidneys could get insurance, but it wasn't without a price for people with two feet and two perfectly fine kidneys.

 

[gold something]

The US government is the biggest player in the health insurance market, and they get to write the rules their private sector competitors have to follow.

How's that working for everybody?

.

Get gov out of that.