Krugman: The facts have a liberal health-care bias

[ProSense]

October 21, 2009

The facts have a liberal health-care bias

A quick thought: now that Congress is getting close to actually passing health-care reform, the question is not so much whether to do anything, and more how to pay for whatever it is we do. As a result, sound-bites and slogans are mattering less, and CBO estimates are mattering more.

And this is pushing reform in a progressive direction.

Serious students of health care have known for a long time that the magic of the marketplace doesn’t work in health care; the United States has the most privatized health-care system in the advanced world, and also the least efficient. The pale reflection of this reality in the current discussion is that reform with a strong public option is cheaper than reform without — which means that as we get closer to really doing something, rhetoric about socialism fades out, and that $100 billion or so in projected savings starts to look awfully attractive.

It has also been clear from international evidence that universality is cheaper than leaving a few people expensively without care. That’s reflected now in the projected savings from a strong employer mandate.

The point is that reality is pushing for a more progressive reform than the Baucus bill. Truly, the facts have a liberal bias.

[joeybee12]

1. Why do facts hate America?

:shrug:

[applegrove]

2. LOL!

[depakid]

3. Carried to the logical conclusion, the analysis leads to single payer

[harry_pothead]

4. Most facts tend to have liberal biases, be they about health care or not

[Vinca]

5. I wish Krugman would address Medicare and how having Medicare For All

would be its savior. It's the perfect solution for saving Medicare because there would be an influx of both cash from premiums and younger, healthier participants to even out the risk pool. Of course, the Grand No Party has already started with the negative talking points about Medicare going bankrupt, yada, yada, yada.