Three Items of Interest. (orig. 6/13/2011)

1) Anyone still laboring under the delusion that the Buffalo News is a left-wing, "lamestream" media friend of labor should have a look at the lead editorial in today's edition. "Standing up to teachers" is the title.  Here's the link:

http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial-page/buffalo-news-editorials/article452914.ece

2) Paul Krugman talks about Medicare in his NY Times column today, and proves that facts are indeed interesting. He discusses Sen. Lieberman's proposal last week to raise the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 67. Lieberman claims that this will "save Medicare."

Krugman points out that "our goal shouldn’t be to 'save Medicare,' whatever that means. It should be to ensure that Americans get the health care they need, at a cost the nation can afford."

He goes on to point out that Medicare saves a lot of money when compared to private insurance.

"... adjusting for overall inflation, Medicare spending per beneficiary rose more than 400 percent from 1969 to 2009. But inflation-adjusted premiums on private health insurance rose more than 700 percent over the same period. So while it’s true that Medicare has done an inadequate job of controlling costs, the private sector has done much worse. And if we deny Medicare to 65- and 66-year-olds, we’ll be forcing them to get private insurance — if they can — that will cost much more than it would have cost to provide the same coverage through Medicare."

It should be pointed out that Medicare insures the oldest and sickest citizens, while many under private sector plans are younger and healthier.

"Indeed, as the economist (and former Reagan adviser) Bruce Bartlett points out, high U.S. private spending on health care, compared with spending in other advanced countries, just about wipes out any benefit we might receive from our relatively low tax burden. So where’s the gain from pushing seniors out of an admittedly expensive system, Medicare, into even more expensive private health insurance?"

Here's the link to his complete column:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/13/opinion/13krugman.html?ref=opinion

3) Here's today's smile. Suppose you bought a house, and paid cash. Then a few months later Bank of America tried to foreclose on your home. Then you went to court to prove that you didn't owe Bank of America any money. The court agreed and assessed your legal fees against Bank of America. Then you waited months, but the bank didn't pay up. What would you do?

If you haven't heard of this story, you'll love it. It would make a great movie! Here's the link (including video):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/05/homeowners-foreclose-on-bank-of-america_n_871540.html