> But I think that's the wrong lesson. The Clinton plan
> actually preserved a big role for private insurers;
> the industry attacked it all the same. And the plan's
> complexity, which was largely a result of attempts to
> placate interest groups, made it hard to sell to the
> public. So I would argue that good economics is also
> good politics: reformers will do best with a
> straightforward single-payer plan, which offers
> maximum savings and, unlike the Clinton plan, can
> easily be explained....."
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/13/opinion/13krugman.html?hp
--------------
Well, to be fair, he still hasn't learned about the fatuousness of the public/private construction when it comes to the ways in which the legislature delegates principal-agent roles throughout the political economy............
-- "Life sure is weird but what else am I to know?" [Jason Pierce]