Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Paul Ryan


  • Please log in to reply
74 replies to this topic

#31 SgtJoo

SgtJoo

    Reppin that Bull City

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,627 posts
  • LocationDurham, NC

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:03 AM

Posted Image

Oh yeah.

#32 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:05 AM

mollycoddle?

#33 SgtJoo

SgtJoo

    Reppin that Bull City

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,627 posts
  • LocationDurham, NC

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:10 AM

Paul Ryan's plan to replace Medicare with a system of vouchers for seniors to buy health care on the private market ... ends the guarantee that all American seniors will have health insurance. The Medicare system we've had in place for the past 45 years promises that once you reach 65, you will be covered by a government-financed health-insurance plan. Mr. Ryan's plan promises that once you reach 65, you will receive a voucher for an amount that he thinks ought to be enough for individuals to purchase a private health-insurance plan. ... If that voucher isn't worth enough for some particular senior to buy insurance, and that particular senior isn't wealthy enough to top off the coverage, or is a bit forgetful and neglects to purchase insurance, there's no guarantee that that person will be insured. It's up to you; you carry the risk.

Mr. Ryan thinks this is a good thing, because individuals who are responsible for paying for their own health insurance will be strongly motivated to seek better insurance at a lower price. I think this is a terrible thing, because the mechanism Mr. Ryan is using to incentivize people to seek better coverage for the price is to expose them to the risk that they will suffer from disease for which their insurance doesn't cover them. The threat that you will suffer illness with inadequate treatment because you can't afford it and your insurance doesn't cover it is certainly a pretty strong motivator for most people to seek better insurance. But the purpose of insurance is to insulate people from risks like that. Furthermore, individuals do not have negotiating power when they go up against health-insurance companies. You and I don't know what the risks or costs of different illnesses and treatments are, and we don't have the time or expertise to evaluate the legal fine print of insurance agreements with the care and attention devoted to them by the insurance companies who write them.

The idea of making market forces work to bring down health-care and health-insurance costs is plausible. What's not plausible is the idea that average individuals are the best-placed people to be carrying out those negotiations. It's entirely possible to set up markets where powerful, well-informed organizations represent individuals in negotiations with insurers and providers in order to bring prices down, without putting those individuals at risk of losing their coverage or of having to go untreated. That's how the Affordable Care Act envisions saving money on Medicare, without running the risk that the elderly will lose their health-insurance coverage. ...


Also, this is worth a read too.

http://krugman.blogs...tiple-unicorns/

#34 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,320 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:16 AM

If only there were large, well organized groups of ordinary folks who, when banded together, could muster up the resources to go up against these big insurance companies and negotiate better rates and coverages, and perhaps even motivate the companies making record profits on the backs of these workers (recognized as the most productive in the world per person) to share those profits a bit to make sure the folks who made things go don't have to go into retirement wondering if they will have to choose between food and medicine, or whether they will have to depend on their children to pay their medical bills.

#35 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,512 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:21 AM

Krugman? Really?

We're talking about reducing government deficits and you post a blog entry from a leftist biased dude that's pissed Obama's not spending MORE government money.

The medicare/aid fix is really nothing more than the prescription drug scenario where it's still a government subsidized healthcare that allows the person to select what's best for their scenario. And in cases where the poor can't even meet the new requirement, there are additional subsidy qualifiers.

Take that Krugman-scheisse out of here.

#36 SgtJoo

SgtJoo

    Reppin that Bull City

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,627 posts
  • LocationDurham, NC

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:44 AM

Take a Nobel winning economist out of here?

Oh, okay. You're smarter than him, I forgot.

#37 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,512 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:48 AM

Know how much worth I put in a Nobel prize?

Arafat...Obama...

#38 SgtJoo

SgtJoo

    Reppin that Bull City

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,627 posts
  • LocationDurham, NC

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:50 AM

Right, the Nobel prize in Economics, I might add.

It's distinctly different from the Peace prize.

#39 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,512 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:53 AM

It's still become a political prize.

I'm judging Krugman by his more recent ramblings about increasing government spending. You agree with him?

#40 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,022 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 10:54 AM

Fwiw, if Ryan's plan is enacted, the republicans can probably forget about winning the 2012 presidential election.

#41 SgtJoo

SgtJoo

    Reppin that Bull City

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,627 posts
  • LocationDurham, NC

Posted 06 April 2011 - 11:08 AM

It's still become a political prize.

I'm judging Krugman by his more recent ramblings about increasing government spending. You agree with him?


So Stigler and Friedman both got the prize as well, were their awards political too?

I wouldn't exactly call rational thought backed by Keynesian analysis and number crunching rambling but sure, call it that. I'm a proponent of government intervention, yes. I think the Austrian school of thought is horseshit.

#42 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,512 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 01:13 PM

off track...but here's your boy Krugman

He's completely assinine and pompous.



#43 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,926 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 02:03 PM

Here's a question or two. The GOP had the house, senate, and White House like 2 years ago.

Why didn't they cut spending then?

Where was Paul Ryan and his courage?

#44 Jase

Jase

    Kuechold Fantasies

  • Administrators
  • 17,097 posts
  • LocationMatthews, NC

Posted 06 April 2011 - 02:06 PM

2 years ago?

#45 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,926 posts

Posted 06 April 2011 - 02:06 PM

What year is it?


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com