Paul Krugman 2007: ObamaCare can “evolve” into single-payer

posted at 2:15 pm on August 26, 2009 by Allahpundit

Another dynamite find by Verum Serum, on an endless mission to expose liberal doublespeak about what the public option would mean in practice. First clip is from two years ago, the second clip — declaring the arguments against the public option to be “sheer nonsense” — from last weekend. My only quibble with VS is that they seem to think there’s some dissembling here by Krugman. But there’s no contradiction: He’d clearly love to see ObamaCare metastasize into socialized medicine, ergo any arguments against that happening are nonsense. Here he is in the Times just a few days ago:

The debate over the public option has, as I said, been depressing in its inanity. Opponents of the option — not just Republicans, but Democrats like Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Ben Nelson — have offered no coherent arguments against it. Mr. Nelson has warned ominously that if the option were available, Americans would choose it over private insurance — which he treats as a self-evidently bad thing, rather than as what should happen if the government plan was, in fact, better than what private insurers offer.

Evidently, for Krugman, his own argument circa 2007 that it might lead inexorably to a government takeover of health insurance isn’t an argument “against” the public option. Nor, I guess, is the fact that ObamaCare might land us another trillion or two deeper in the hole. Remember, this is the guy who basically shrugged at the news yesterday that the 10-year deficit projection would be 30 percent higher than thought. Exit question via Ace: “Will Krugman ever address this major controversy in which he appears to occupy a central and dispositive role?”

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air



Trackback URL


Just another reason I refer to him as “Former Economist Paul Krugman.”

Reality is developing a very plastic quality lately, isn’t it? I fear the President’s boldness in bullshitting us to our faces is spreading.

And AnninCA:

But let me express my real opinion about Paul. He did some really good work in grad school, managed to parlay that into some post-grad work, won his prize.

As much as I dislike Krugman, this passage is practically sopping with presumptuousness and familiarity. Did I manage to miss your having graduated from Yale or MIT somewhere in your incessant nattering?

DrSteve on August 26, 2009 at 6:50 PM

Wow. Shouldn’t the desicated, side-of-her-mouth talkin’ suckin’-at-the-teat-of-government Amy Goodman rename that show?
Democracy Now? Oh really?

How about Socialism Now?

Replace that Lady Liberty with some communist era artwork. A Prole with raised fist, or maybe a Che icon.


Our tax dollars at work

themistocles on August 26, 2009 at 8:25 PM

Once the target is acquired, squeeze the trigger only after you have verified focus and begun inhalation through both nostrils……

dmann on August 26, 2009 at 8:31 PM

For all that the left loves to b*tch about Enron, why has this man not been tagged as Enron Krugman or Enron Paul?

NTropy on August 26, 2009 at 9:40 PM

I posted already on what I thought public option could be.

I’ll let that post stand

Pretty typical. You don’t link to it, or even refer to where it might be found. You simply claim that you said it at some point in the past.

You are sooo dishonest. Any time a real question is asked of you, you don’t answer it.

You don’t answer why you have suddenly changed your mind about this bill. Or why you defended, until this thread, the “public option” in this bill and claimed it would not lead to single payer.

You simply are dishonest and are not here in good faith. But you do put “*ha ha” or a smiley face next to your inane platitudes, so you must be a good person.

Your shtick is so transparent. And typical of the moronic left. I’ll bet you honestly believe you are clever and insightful.

Monkeytoe on August 27, 2009 at 9:14 AM