Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Paul Krugman: "Bad for the Country"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-25-05 11:11 AM
Original message
Paul Krugman: "Bad for the Country"
Edited on Fri Nov-25-05 11:13 AM by Bozita
Truthout has the entire piece up now:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/112505Z.shtml


    Bad for the Country
    By Paul Krugman
    The New York Times

    Friday 25 November 2005

    "What was good for our country," a former president of General Motors once declared, "was good for General Motors, and vice versa." GM, which has been losing billions, has announced that it will eliminate 30,000 jobs. Is what's bad for General Motors bad for America?

    In this case, yes.

    Most commentary about GM's troubles is resigned: pundits may regret the decline of a once-dominant company, but they don't think anything can or should be done about it. And commentary from some conservatives has an unmistakable tone of satisfaction, a sense that uppity workers who joined a union and made demands are getting what they deserve.

    We shouldn't be so complacent. I won't defend the many bad decisions of GM's management, or every demand made by the United Automobile Workers. But job losses at General Motors are part of the broader weakness of US manufacturing, especially the part of US manufacturing that offers workers decent wages and benefits. And some of that weakness reflects two big distortions in our economy: a dysfunctional health care system and an unsustainable trade deficit.

    According to A. T. Kearney, last year General Motors spent $1,500 per vehicle on health care. By contrast, Toyota spent only $201 per vehicle in North America, and $97 in Japan. If the United States had national health insurance, GM would be in much better shape than it is.

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-25-05 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
1. And The Logical Conclusion: Universal One-Payer Health Care
NOT that give-away to the insurance companies fraud that Hillary tried to pass onto the public!

Good for America, Good for GM, and about freaking time! It's the #1 block against American Manufacturing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-25-05 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I prefer single payer gov't run, but second best would be
require health insurance be run as non-profits with fixed percentages spent on administration and executive salaries.

Regulate their ass, and hold execs criminally responsible if anyone dies from withheld reasonable treatment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC