Why Krugman Is Wrong

John Edwards and Paul Krugman are right. When was the last time large corporations willingly surrendered power? Their only mandate is to increase profits. Senator Obama's big table will do nothing but provide the insurance/drug companies a platform to pander and posture about "doing the right thing". All the while their allies in Congress will work behind the scenes to do whatever it takes to kill any real reform. In the end it will be the same old song and dance.

Arbitrary power is indigting the insurance companies for their failures instead of explaning why they shouldn't be part of the solution versus being excluded from the discussion. John Edwards is the naive one...and I think we are all naive if we think he is going to be the D's nominee, let alone President.

Many of us think that only our governments (local, state and federal) collect taxes. When a business is a making a profit by selling a product more than it is worth it is also taxing its customer; this tax is not progressive and more harmful to the society than the taxes our governments collect.. We often ask for caps on taxes but we do not ask for caps on profits of companies.

Obama and Bush have something in common they are dumbbbbbbbbbb bubby

How many people, when given the choice will choose the government run County hospital over a privately ran hospital? In how many communities is the County hospital the choice of last ressort? The answer to this is why Europe is already moving toward private hospitals. Long waits and poor quality of service is forcing countries with socialised medicine to realize that capitalism in healthcare is the best choice. As has already been stated, no 'listening' or big table or coersion can force publically traded healthcare and drug companies to knowing operate in a manner that is detrimental to its shareholders. Does Edwards or Obabma propose to underwrite their loses? Can you say 'tax increase'...

Having been a Project Manager in a large company for many years, I was always implementing change. That's what a Project Manager does. And I learned early on, that to have a successful project implementation, you need everyone's support. Everyone needs to feel that their views were taken into account, and needs to understand why their views were or were not followed. To do that, everyone has to be part of the discussion, so that all views are heard by everyone. This leads to both making the best decisions as well as having support when you need it. If involved, people feel as if they are part of the project, and have some ownership in the results. As a smart person once told me, "it's much better to have everyone inside the tent with you than to have people outside the tent, urinating on the tent".

The other benefit of Obama's on or near top with voters is the escalating level of the pro/con debates... Thank you for another intelligent input - hopefully leading more of us to return to at least some thinking...

What part of massive healthcare fraud, egregious conduct by insurance and other healthcare players, unconsionable suffering, impoverishment, and incessant profiteering is difficult to understand? Edwards is absolutely right about dealing with healthcare payers-to-play-and-corrupt. Obama has misread the lessons Hillary failed to learn in the early 90s ... he believes that Kumbaya will convince the most greedy elements in our society to abdicate their massive earnings to join together and provide affordable universal healthcare. The sad, unfortunate truth is that the nation is about to cast ballots for candidates without an independent disclosure of 95% of the information required to be informed about the current healthcare non-system and what will be required to establish an accountable and cost-effective healthcare system.

Thank you Mr. Alter. Senator Obama's plan is the most realistic. No one is perfect and has all the answers, but how refreshing it is to have a candidate that is willing to not only acknowledge that they are not perfect, but will work and listen to all sides to find the right solutions. I'm going to work hard in Maryland to see that he gets elected our next President!

Thank you Mr. Alter. His plan is the most realistic. I'm a proud supporter of Senator Obama and will work hard in Maryland to see that he's elected!

Thank you Mr. Alter for elucidating with clear examples from history on why Obama's approach to health care excels and why brute force never works. Senator Obama always shines through with leadership unlike any other candidate. I live in predominantly white Iowa, and Obama is ahead in the polls and is loved here. So that pretty much answers the question in other comments on whether the world is ready for a black president. Senator Obama leads all other candidates in intelligence, judgement, honesty and accomplishment. American is overdue for a leader who will unite us. Obama is the one!

Mr. Alter,

I totally agree with you. I have been a fan of Mr. Krugman. But his attack on Obama is totally baseless. First of all, I don't agree with Mr. Krugmans partisan stand saying that there is no way we can build bipartisanship to achieve goals for the common good. There is ideological divide between Democrats and Republicans, but a skilled leader with the best intention should be able to build trust, bridge and consensus. Actually this is what real leadership for and means. Bush has not only failed in this regard but deliberately heightened partisanship for his own advantage. But this doesn???t mean that we should not have high hope for our future leader who calls upon on each and every one of us to heed the better angels of our nature and not ??? and not ??? our basest fears. Based on Mr. Krugmans writing, I feel he has become unreasonable. It seems like if Obama doesnt follow exactly as Mr. Paul envisions how health insurance reform should be, then there is something wrong with Obama. But we all know columnists only need to use their brains and their pens. Being a President you have to encounter the complicated and often impossible reality. Even Obama comes out with a perfect plan for health insurance reform, there is no way it can come through without modifications. Thats why the real leadership is required to persuade, negotiate, comprise and build common grounds in order to achieve the best possible results. During Obamas eight years in state legislature and as US Senator, he demonstrated such leadership skills. He was well-respected by both his democratic and republican colleagues for his ability to build consensus and get things done. His first bill in the senate was passed and co-sponsored with Republican Senator Tom Coburn. I respect Mr. Krugman for his forceful criticism of all the wrongs and frauds conducted by Bush administration. I even admire a purist who insists on his conviction. But to categorize Obama as anti-change is to deliberately omit his track record as a reform-minded progressive.

Any politician resides somewhere on the spectrum between being a base calculating deal maker and an ideologue. When it comes to health care, I see Clinton as too far to one end, Edwards too far to the other, and Obama walking the fine line that balances the desirable with the achievable.

Actually it should be pointed out that Clinton didn't achieve healthcare reform... Getting all the corporations to set around the table didn't actually accomplish anything.

Healthcare and drug companies are by and large publicly traded companies. They are not allowed to simply give up their profits willingly for the good of the country or other reason...the stoockholders would sue the corporate officers into oblivion.

Good Analysis Mr. Alter.

It is clear from both his campaign tone and also his policy positions that Senator Obama is the pragmatic change agent who will not only open the process to the people but will also ask those with different opinions (including drug and insurance companies) to participate.

Obama constantly says that he while the drug and insurance companies will have a seat at the table, they will not buy ALL the chairs. Obama's record in Illinois indicates that he will get the neccessary changes through the congress by listening to all diverse opinions.

Good Analysis Mr. Alter.

It is clear from both his campaign tone and also his policy positions that Senator Obama is the pragmatic change agent who will not only open the process to the people but will also ask those with different opinions (including drug and insurance companies) to participate.

Obama constantly says that he while the drug and insurance companies will have a seat at the table, they will not buy ALL the chairs. Obama's record in Illinois indicates that he will get the neccessary changes through the congress by listening to all diverse opinions.