Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forumWarren supporter Paul Krugman: Warren's MFA plan is "serious" but probably won't happen
He's giving her an A for effort. Basically saying that it's a good academic effort at a plan, even if she's probably underestimating costs and overestimating revenue, but she isn't going to get it passed anyway.
FWIW, Krugman, like most realists, is in favor of the public option.
But he likes Warren enough to give her kudos for trying hard to come up with a plan.
Twitter thread:
Link to tweet
His opinion piece for the NYT, after he saw all the details of the plan:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/01/opinion/did-warren-pass-the-medicare-test-i-think-so.html
Well, the Warren plan is now out. And Id say that she passed the test. Experts will argue for months whether shes being too optimistic whether her cost estimates are too low and her revenue estimates too high, whether we can really do this without middle-class tax hikes. You might say that time will tell, but it probably wont: Even if Warren becomes president, and Dems take the Senate too, its very unlikely that Medicare for all will happen any time soon.
-snip-
Am I enthusiastically endorsing this plan? No. I still think that a public-option-type plan, which lets people buy into Medicare, would have a better chance of actually becoming reality and may well be where a President Warren actually ends up if she gets to the White House. And the plans optimism on costs and revenues could be wrong.
-snip-
So what has Warren achieved here? Realistically, her health care plan is more aspirational than her other plans. Enhanced financial regulation and universal child care are things she might well be able to accomplish if she not only wins, but wins big, next year. Medicare for All, not so much. And may I say, it would serve the public well if these topics plus climate change! got more attention in future debates, and health care a bit less.
Warrens task was, instead, to counter criticism that she was being evasive on a big issue. I think she has met that challenge.
I often agree with Krugman.
But I think he's being too generous in this column which essentially is patting Warren on the head for doing homework.
I think she needed to do more than just counter criticism that she'd been evasive.
This isn't a term paper she's being graded on.
Krugman, as much a fan of Warren as he is, admits here that her MFA plan won't become reality.
And she's running on policy proposals that voters will be judging by whether they're at all realistic, not by Warren's ability to write plans that sound good until you wonder if the numbers actually make sense, or if they have any chance of getting through Congress.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Thekaspervote
(32,691 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
George II
(67,782 posts)...tax evasion and fraud!! Shouldn't that intrinsically be what a President/government should be doing anyway? Also, part of it is being paid for by overhauling the immigration system. If Presidents past haven't been able to accomplish that, how would Warren do so?
These are the types of things that makes one skeptical.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
ritapria
(1,812 posts)A serious plan to finance MFA would include an increase in Payroll taxes
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Thekaspervote
(32,691 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
progressoid
(49,933 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
dpibel
(2,826 posts)I believe, purposely or inadvertently, you are attributing bias to Krugman.
What is your basis for labeling him a Warren supporter.
I'm not aware that Krugman has endorsed any candidate. And I think it rather unlikely that he will.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
highplainsdem
(48,890 posts)Link to tweet
I guess I could have called him a "huge Warren fan" but "Warren supporter" seemed a bit less awkward.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
BeyondGeography
(39,341 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)She is not proposing paying for MFA by taxing dancing leprechauns and silver ponies. Does her numbers mesh? Maybe not, but that may not be a major issue for her longterm.
Most Americans know that healthcare costs are out of control, but I don't that emphasis is being put in the right places. Americans, as a people, are very overweight and have a subset of the population that has a fixation with guns (that they solve every stressful problem). It is pretty well accepted that being overweight reduces a person's healthiness and opens the door to a variety of dehabilitating illnesses, fixing those issues cost an enormous amount of money. I read complaints right here on DU about the cost of Insulin, heart MEDs and some blood pressure MEDs, but no one looks at how people got to the point of needing those MEDs. Some causes that brought people to the point of needing the MEDs was genetic (and even those causes are manageable when people make a concerted effort, if a person knows that diabetes runs in the family, being overweight and eating the wrong things is akin to pouring gasoline on a fire), but most of the issues simply are due to people not having the will power to take better care of their health.
Some of the willpower issues are economic, some vegetables are inexpensive, but 1 head of broccoli or 1 tomato can be pricey if the goal is to have a person eat several helpings per week - when a family of four is spending $5 per week on one food item, that just is not going to work. And fresh fruit can be even worse on a family's budget. I often see criticism here on DU about certain farming methods and about canned vegetables and fruit, but maybe the focus should be on is a chemical used in agriculture really harmful in the quantities that a typical person would consume per week. Since canned fruit and vegetables tend to be produce that is nutritious, but physically unattractive to the point where putting it in produce bins would result in it not being sold, or the produce is approaching becoming overripe and gets pulled from markets and sent to canneries. If people are getting the right nutrients from food and are not facing unacceptable side effects, why shouldn't we have a national policy to encourage people to eat those foods, given the benefits to issues like weight control and prevention of some illnesses that don't have excessive weight as a cause?
If we are going to truly reduce healthcare costs in a sustainable way, all of us are going to have to stare our sacred cows in the face and admit that our phobias about some things are wrong, while our analysis on others is right on target. Then as a nation, we need to move toward sensible changes.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
BeyondGeography
(39,341 posts)Food, the good fresh stuff, can be relatively expensive in this country. At least compared with France and Germany where I have family and visit a few times a year. Theyre slimmer, they have better eating habits (the salty snack/soft drink bingeing-on-the-couch thing is a lot less common there, eg), and they dont pay nearly as much for produce as I do here in the NYC area. Factor in a much more affordable and accessible health care system and you see how extreme our situation is here. I hope I live long enough to see it change fundamentally.
My post was a bit tongue-in-cheek and alluded to this:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-says-warren-is-making-it-up-on-medicare-for-all-payment
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Gothmog
(144,884 posts)I and other true Democrats have been working hard to turn Texas blue. We hope to pick up six congressional seats in addition to the two seats we flipped in 2018. We have a chance to defeat Cornyn in the Senate. The Democrats picked up 12 seats in the Texas House and need 9 more to take control of the Texas House prior to the next redistricting session. If Biden is the nominee, Texas will be a battleground state. If Warren or sanders is the nominee. Texas will not be a battle ground state and we can forget about keeping the two seats that we flipped in 2018
Speaker Pelosi is worried about losing control of the House with a weak top of the ballot ticket with a program that will kill down ballot candidates
.
Link to tweet
This is going to cause down-ballot damage in swing districts and states if shes the nominee, Buentello says, describing how her Pueblo-area constituents who voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump in 2016 were already echoing criticisms about a giant, one-size-fits-all big government run plan that cancels private health insurance and raises taxes.
Story Continued Below
The fear of blowback is indicative of the broad and largely negative response to Warrens proposal from centrist, moderate and rural Democrats many of whom, like Buentello, back Joe Biden in the primary. And it exposes the fault line between those who fret about winning voters in the center and the activist progressive base propelling Warren to the front of the Democratic pack.
The long-awaited plan to raise the $20.5 trillion she says is needed to pay for single-payer health care in America is Warrens attempt to answer critics after weeks of questions from rival candidates about the cost of her proposal and the prospect of higher taxes. Warren promised, as she has in the past, that "not one penny in middle-class tax increases is necessary to finance the effort.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Cha
(296,775 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Cha
(296,775 posts)He lays it well.
Thank you, highplainsdem
Funny someone said .. ".. so she's making it up?.." Why would anyone even go there.. that's not what Krugman said at all.
It seems to me all this pushback on EW's mfa plan has only helped to get more information out.
And, this from Krugman
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Cha
(296,775 posts)hpd !
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Cha
(296,775 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden