“I have another proposal: let’s save money by making stools and chairs with only one leg.”
Krugman is trying to sound clever like Bastiat, Hazlitt, Friedman (Milton, not Thomas), but he falls flat.
“Ban discrimination based on medical history, and you get an adverse-selection death spiral, in which healthy people opt out and premiums soar. You can’t solve that without both requiring that healthy people buy insurance and helping those with lower incomes afford the premiums.”
What a hack. He sees the line between the two points he himself made, but he refuses to follow it. Premiums will soar because when “the healthy” have to pay more, i.e. as much as “the sick,” despite the former’s lower usage of health care resources. So “the healthy” rationally decide that insurance isn’t worth it, “the sick” will have to bear the full cost of what they cost insurers. Heaven forfend people should actually, you know, have to pay for the resources they consume!
Insurers don’t want to insure people with bad medical histories because, you know, it’s stupid to insure someone who will cost many times more than he’ll pay in premiums. But that’s the essence of socialized medicine, or any form of socialism. There are some of us who work for what we have, and we refuse to turn over our property for others to spend.
I mentioned before that my mother had cancer, caught very early, and it hasn’t returned. What I don’t think I mentioned is that her individual private policy is hella expensive. We really can’t complain: women in her family die from heart disease or cancer, so it makes perfect sense that she should have to pay more than, say, a Japanese woman whose family tend to live into their 80s with relatively few medical problems.
“Compassion: we care about the victims of our policies.”
Typical horseshit from Krugman. You’re a “victim” just because other people aren’t being forced to pay for your welfare state and socialized medicine?