How do you guys feel about that claim in my post title? Probably a bit of an understatement, eh?
Now consider the following from Krugman’s latest post on Obamacare:
A few relatively affluent, healthy people are paying more for coverage; a few high-income taxpayers are paying more in taxes; a much larger number of Americans are getting coverage that was previously unavailable and/or unaffordable; and most people are seeing no difference at all, except that they no longer have to fear what happens if they lose their current coverage.
Just re-read that a few times. (And when I say “a few times,” I don’t mean several million times. I mean, a few.)
That is truly dishonest, wouldn’t you say? If he had said “a relatively small proportion” or even “relatively few Americans,” that could have been defensible and we could go to the estimates to see how accurate his claims are. But when Krugman says a few–and he does it twice, so it’s not some grammar glitch in how he started the sentence–that implies that it’s literally a handful of people, doesn’t it? The only reason we know “that can’t possibly be what he means” is that we independently know that it would be absurd to suggest the literal interpretation of his statements.
I probably don’t need to mention that the title of Krugman’s post is, “Beyond the Lies.”
(David R. Henderson has a different complaint with the same Krugman post.)