Health care lies and the stupidity of Paul Krugman

[Zebra]

@friedo

It was a tad more than a “discrepancy.” It was a lie. And a major presidential candidate using a blatant lie in a campaign speech is also an issue worthy of the media’s attention.

They are, and should be, doing both.

They are not covering the health care issue. They have never done any sort of major expose on the way health care works.
This way of campaigning, telling a story of a person to illustrate a policy point, (kind of like Jesus telling a parable) was used quite a bit by Ronald Reagan. (I don’t know if he invented it or not but he used it extensively) One of his favorite stories was about the Welfare Queen of Detroit who got 37 (or 27 or 32) welfare checks a month and drove a Cadillac. This was not ‘true’ at all and the press just repeated the story.

[Syntropy]

@Xema

which seems to imply that you find the errors of Krugman & HRC not very important.

I’d suggest they are quite important, since such errors invariable become a lightning rod for criticism and thus strongly tend to derail honest debate. Perhaps the worst thing to have in any discussion is an ally who spouts nonsense.

I would agree that yes, they absolutely should have gotten their facts straight. But compared to correcting the system, I find it a distant second. As Zebra pointed out, it seems people are content to get in a furor over whether or not the story was exaggerated, but are perfectly content to put up with what I can only deem a national disgrace. I don’t half wonder if it isn’t because it’s easier to complain about than actually addressing the real issue.

[Jackmannii]

@Maureen

As Zebra pointed out, it seems people are content to get in a furor over whether or not the story was exaggerated, but are perfectly content to put up with what I can only deem a national disgrace. I don’t half wonder if it isn’t because it’s easier to complain about than actually addressing the real issue.

And as I noted, lies or “stretching the truth” or picking up on handy stories that turn out to be false will turn off people who have reason to suspect that they’re not being given the truth about health care reform - as well as giving ammo to opponents. There are plenty of real examples of abuses that can be pointed to - maybe not all as dramatic and heart-wrenching as Bachtel was supposed to be, but accurate.

The press as a whole deserves brickbats for not jumping on this false account sooner, as well as a lack of skepticism regarding other dubious propositions - like the meme from major candidates that says we’re going to save oodles of money signing up hordes of uninsured people for mandatory preventative care. We’ll have healthier people and less preventable misery IMO, but tests breed more tests and procedures, and it’s going to cost a ton. I know some studies suggest otherwise, but I’m not buying the “savings”.

Give me a well-thought out universal coverage plan and an honest presentation, and I’ll support it, as I think it’s something we can no longer do without. Lying to me is not acceptable.

[Syntropy]

@Jackmannii

Lying to me is not acceptable.

And again I would ask…was it a lie? Or was it shoddy fact checking? I’m not saying HRC’s camp has a reputation for honesty, but it seems you’re asserting she knew it was wrong and went ahead with it anyway. If that’s not what you’re saying, then you need to stop using the word “lie.”

[Bricker]

@Zebra

This way of campaigning, telling a story of a person to illustrate a policy point, (kind of like Jesus telling a parable) was used quite a bit by Ronald Reagan. (I don’t know if he invented it or not but he used it extensively) One of his favorite stories was about the Welfare Queen of Detroit who got 37 (or 27 or 32) welfare checks a month and drove a Cadillac. This was not ‘true’ at all and the press just repeated the story.

I thought he was talking about the Linda Taylor case:

@Chicago Tribune

Linda Taylor, the 47-year-old “welfare queen,” was being held in a jail in Tucson, Ariz., Friday at the request of Chicago police in lieu of a $100,000 bond.

She is charged with grand larceny as a result of allegedly having bilked the Illinois Public Aid Department of an estimated $100,000 a year through fraudulent welfare claims.

@The New York Times

“Welfare Queen” Becomes
Issue in Reagan Campaign
The Washington Star
WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 – Few people realize it, but Linda Taylor, a 47-year-old Chcago welfare recipient, has become a major campaign issue in the New Hampshire Republican Presidential primary.

Former Gov. Ronald Reagan of California has referred to her at nearly every stop, using her as part of his “citizens’ press conference” format.

“There’s a woman in Chicago,” the Republican candidate said recently to an audience in Gilford, N.H., during his free-swinging attack on welfare abuses. “She has 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards and is collecting veterans’ benefits on four nonexisting deceased husbands.”

[Bricker]

@Bricker

I thought he was talking about the Linda Taylor case:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2005/is_2_41/ai_n24240076/pg_6

In 1974, the Chicago Tribune began covering the bizarre case of Linda Taylor, the original “welfare queen.” She was charged with defrauding Illinois welfare programs by collecting welfare cash grants, social security and food stamps under multiple aliases. Taylor’s story generated significant media coverage nationally, as well as in her hometown of Chicago. Although the specifics fluctuated considerably between articles, Taylor’s deceptive techniques were described in careful detail. The Chicago Tribune reported that she had illegally received over $200,000 by using more than 100 aliases in 12 different states. (38) She allegedly had at least 31 addresses, 25 phone numbers, 3 cars (including one Cadillac), and several husbands (most dead and one 25 years her junior). (39) Her physical form was as elusive as her legal identity. Investigators alleged she had 30 different wigs and had claimed benefits as a white, an African American, and a Filipina. (40) Despite these remarkable estimates, prosecutors were ultimately only able to prove Taylor had defrauded the state of $8,000 using four separate aliases.

It was Chicago journalists who originally crowned Taylor the “welfare queen.” (41) The moniker stuck, although welfare fraud was hardly Taylor’s only legal transgression. The Chicago Tribune recounted tales of Taylor’s alleged robberies, bigamy, and kidnapping, and told how she had collected fees as a “voodoo doctor” and tried to claim the inheritance of a policy runner who had died with $700,000 in his home. (42) Despite these diverse charges against Taylor, welfare fraud remained her defining feature, and the press always referred to her as the welfare queen.

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@RedFury

For the sake of truth, I think you should change your handle to “Two and a Half Yards of Turds” or simply “Pantsload” for brevity.

Obviously Katrina blew right by you, because the scenes that came out of that particular mess rival many I’ve seen from Third World Nations. Of course, I’m sure none of those people “had their shit together.” :rolleyes:

The idea that the situation with Katrina was equal to what happens routinely in the Third World* is a complete lie. Do you honestly think the people affected by Katrina would trade places with the people in the Kakuma Refugee Camp?
*I made reference to refugees, not the Third World.

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@Maureen

Thank you so much for exemplifying the very attitude I outlined earlier. I would hate to not have a handy post to reference when someone came in demanding a cite that people are apathetic to the state of our healthcare system.

The problem is not only that people are unable to afford quality care. The problem is also that standards of care have decreased. In the time that I have been a nurse, I have seen nurse to patient ratios drop to dangerous levels. Medical assistants and nursing assistants tasked with procedures that once only an RN could administer. Discharging patients in 24 hours or less after a majory surgical procedure. An increased incidence of writing a prescription instead of treating an illness until there was no alternative to surgery. Reduced nursing classes and wait lists for nursing schools when the need for nurses is dire.

The system is broken. Saying “it’s bad other places, too” is hardly an excuse for not fixing it.

If we would stop forcing hospitals to give care to people who cannot afford it, we could get rid of a lot of these problems. Free-riders* should not be allowed to suck money out of the system.

• Including children.

[Omegaman]

Maybe we could recycle those useless fuckers. I remember hearing about something called Soylent Green.

[Guinastasia]

@Two and a Half Inches of Fun

If we would stop forcing hospitals to give care to people who cannot afford it, we could get rid of a lot of these problems. Free-riders* should not be allowed to suck money out of the system.

• Including children.

Ah, in other words, “Oh, well, if they’re poor and can’t pay, just let 'em die. Even the kids-after all, they’re just grow up to be Adult Free-riders!”

God, you sicken me. You are a vile excuse for a human being.

@Omegaman

Maybe we could recycle those useless fuckers. I remember hearing about something called Soylent Green.

Starting with the poster above you, perhaps?

[vivalostwages]

@Two and a Half Inches of Fun

If we would stop forcing hospitals to give care to people who cannot afford it, we could get rid of a lot of these problems. Free-riders* should not be allowed to suck money out of the system.

• Including children.

[2.5]Yeah, and those people who have jobs that don’t offer insurance plans should go and get better jobs, 'cause that’s soooo easy to do. And the ones who don’t make enough money should pressure their employers to pay them more. And people who can’t get coverage due to pre-existing conditions should be cast adrift on ice floes so they can drift away and die already.[/2.5]
:rolleyes:

Seriously: What the shit?

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@Guinastasia

Ah, in other words, “Oh, well, if they’re poor and can’t pay, just let 'em die. Even the kids-after all, they’re just grow up to be Adult Free-riders!”

Pretty much, but just because a child has irresponsible parents that does not mean the child will also be irresponsible.

There are great opportunities in this country for people willing to work hard. My parents have neighbors who came to this country from Laos with nothing and who could not even speak the language. Today, they own a string of businesses and are very successful.

It is difficult to say children should not be given medical care, but children should be the responsibility of the parents. If the parents are not willing to do what is necessary for their children, others in society should not be forced to pick the slack. Private charity may be able to help, but it should by choice, not force of the government.

A good solution would be to remove children from irresponsible parents and sell them to people who will be better able to care for them. This could work especially well for for babies, due to high demand.

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@Guinastasia

Starting with the poster above you, perhaps?

This a veiled threat against my life and is totally inappropriate.

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@vivalostwages

[2.5]Yeah, and those people who have jobs that don’t offer insurance plans should go and get better jobs, 'cause that’s soooo easy to do. And the ones who don’t make enough money should pressure their employers to pay them more. And people who can’t get coverage due to pre-existing conditions should be cast adrift on ice floes so they can drift away and die already.[/2.5]
:rolleyes:

Seriously: What the shit?

It is not easy. I never said it was easy.

[Leaper]

Hey, we once had a poster here who said that food was a luxury, not a right.

2.5" hasn’t gotten near that level yet to me.

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@Leaper

Hey, we once had a poster here who said that food was a luxury, not a right.

2.5" hasn’t gotten near that level yet to me.

Food is not a right. It is a necessity, but not a right.

When a child starves to death in Africa, are his rights being violated? Were can he go to enforce this right? What is a right without a remedy?

[Syntropy]

@Two and a Half Inches of Fun

If we would stop forcing hospitals to give care to people who cannot afford it, we could get rid of a lot of these problems. Free-riders* should not be allowed to suck money out of the system.

• Including children.

Which falls under the amended Hippocratic Oath: “First do no harm except to those that can’t afford it.”

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@Maureen

Which falls under the amended Hippocratic Oath: “First do no harm except to those that can’t afford it.”

Not treating someone is not harming them. It is just not helping them.

And since you love the Hippocratic Oath so much, can I assume you are against doctors performing abortions?

[Syntropy]

@Two and a Half Inches of Fun

Not treating someone is not harming them. It is just not helping them.

And since you love the Hippocratic Oath so much, can I assume you are against doctors performing abortions?

Not treating someone IS harming them. Allowing someone to come to harm amounts to harming them.

Likewise, if a patient decides that the best thing for them is to have an abortion, refusing them the care they are after is also doing harm.

[Two_and_a_Half_Inches_of_Fun]

@Maureen

Not treating someone IS harming them. Allowing someone to come to harm amounts to harming them.

Likewise, if a patient decides that the best thing for them is to have an abortion, refusing them the care they are after is also doing harm.

Have you sold all your luxury items to help the starving children in Africa? If not, why are you harming them?

As to abortion, it is specifically mentioned:

@Hippocratic Oath

I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect. Similarly **I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy. **In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art.

Still support an unamended Hippocratic Oath?