Category Archives: Government

Food And Medical Care

During the hearing of Obamacare, the news was full of analysis.  One of those pieces, in the “USA Today”, made a point that food is more of a basic need to people than healthcare:

A brief submitted by 215 economists argues that food is even more basic to survival than health care…

I was struck by this last night as I was cleaning out some of my “stack” in my office last night.

See, the food delivery market, while not perfectly so, is a free market example of how goods can be distributed efficiently.  Based on demand and the profit motive, food stuffs are delivered to a literal market where individual shoppers are allowed to “ration” themselves based, in part, by how much money they have and what types of services they want.

For example, in my market I can by generic chicken soup, Ramen noodles and rice.  Or, I can walk 50 feet away and purchase hand rolled sushi, fillet mignon, $60 wine and lobster.

As a real example of the power of markets I picked up this flier:

For $5, this profit driven market is offering a meal that feeds 4 people, perhaps more if the kids are younger.

If medical care were subject to the same market forces you would see the same thing happen with the cost of medical care.  In the same way, if you allowed health insurance to be impacted by the same market forces, you would see prices of health insurance react in the same manner.

It’s only when government intercedes, by mandating acupuncture coverage, or by restricting the sale of insurance polices across state lines, that you see the price of a good or service go up.

The Health Care Market

One of the many arguments made by the supporters of Obamacare is that there exists a health care market.  And, as such, congress can regulate it.  This includes the requirement to purchase insurance.  A counter argument to this line of reasoning is that the government can regulate commerce once contracted, but not before.  That is, if you choose to purchase a car, congress can regulate things like seat belts and emission technologies.  But they can’t require you to purchase car.

Which gets us to the point.  Defenders of Obamacare will argue that we are already IN the market, by being alive we are in the “health care contract”.  And this is because if we get sick or hurt and cannot afford to pay for our care, the rest of us must pick up the cost.

It’s hard to argue this line of thinking.

We ARE all in this market if you think of it this way.  Either acting as people who are assuming a cost for those who act less responsibly or by acting in a responsible manner ourselves.

But then it occurred to me.  The only reason that we are in this “market” to begin with is through government mandate to begin with.  Which is, “You cannot turn away a patient based on ability to pay.”

If the government didn’t first require that I pay for all people’s irresponsibility, then I would not have costs ascribed to me that now require me to purchase insurance.

This is what the Court meant when they asked, “Can you create a market that forces everyone to participate and then regulate that market without limit?”

 

The Gun Mandate

We all live in a dangerous world.  Crime all around us.  We spend untold amounts of money keeping ourselves safe.  It might be stronger locks on our doors, cameras in the roof, alarm systems in the house.

I have a safe; two even.

And then we spend money on public infrastructure.  We pay the local police, the state police and even federal law enforcement officials.

Given that private ownership of guns reduces crime, and that we are all living in a crime market, I would like to see the federal government mandate gun ownership.

 

I’m Just A Long Haired Hippie: But Qualified For The Supreme Court

The argument goes something like this:

By allowing people to make their own decisions, they pass costs on to other American citizens who make better and more correct decisions.  Therefore, we can mandate that what we feel is a better and more correct decision; health insurance.

That’s the Left.  That’s Obama.  That’s what people who claim to love liberty want to embrace.  That a beneficent government, acting in our best interests, can mandate behavior.

I’ve challenged this line of thought by asking if we could mandate blueberries.  See, blueberries are one of the most healthy foods available.  It consistently ranks in the top 5; heck, top 3.  People who eat blueberries are healthier than people who don’t.

There is little scientific evidence to dispute this.  If any.

Yet we know that we cannot mandate that people buy blueberries.

But if this health care mandate goes through, we are saying that the government CAN mandate blueberries.  Heck, we then admit that the government mandate that we GROW blueberries.

And yet this argument has been ignored.

Until now:

Antonin Scalia, asked if the government might require Americans to buy broccoli or automobiles. Returning to the limits thing, Scalia asked, “If the government can do this, what else can it … do?”

Sub green for blue and the argument is the same.

What can the government NOT mandate?

 

 

The Role Of Government

 

The government should be a ref.

Higher Taxes: Less Revenue

 

In the latest example of the Laffer Curve we see that 0% of $60 billion is less than [some number > 0]% of $60 billion.

See, Apple doesn’t think that having to pay the world’s highest corporate income tax is in the best interests of the company.  Or the shareholders.  So it’s not going to pay the tax.

Continue reading

Health Care Mandate: Where Does It End

Very soon the Obama administration is going to argue before the Supreme Court that the United States Government is able to mandate the purchase of a private good.  In this case, health insurance.  The reason, as defined by the administration, is that by not purchasing insurance, millions of Americans will transfer untold billions in health care costs to others.

The idea is that to provide basic health services to everyone, the government is able to mandate insurance because it relates to “citizen’s health.”

When faced with arguments like this in the past by supporters of the health care bill and the individual mandate, I’ve asked where the government would draw the line.  Further, I’ve asked for specifics on what the nature of a blueberry mandate and the health care mandate would be.

No answer.  However, I am happy to see that I am not alone in my musings.

Continue reading

Teacher Evaluations: An Interesting Take On Value Add

Recently New York city published the results of a three year study on teacher’s scores.  The scores are based on the value-add mentality.  This is the idea that a teacher can influence a student in their class and the measurement of this value is tracked by how well a student does on tests in the years following having had that teacher in class.  From the perspective of someone who works in an industry that tries very very hard to measure the intangibles, I think this is a very clever method of determining impact.

Predictably the teachers and the teacher unions are objecting.  And the range of reasons is fascinating.

Continue reading

North Carolina School Lunches: Child Car Commission

So, North Carolina has taken center stage in recent weeks.  A Hoke County school teacher noticed that a child’s bag-lunch didn’t meet proscribed nutritional guidelines.  In one case, the bag-lunch contained a turkey and cheese sandwich, apples and apple juice.  Missing was the vegetable.  The lunch was either replaced or supplemented with a school provided hot lunch.  Further adding to the outcry was the fact that the child didn’t eat the veggies provided; she only ate the chicken nuggets.

I think this is the classic case of what folks mean when they say that government is too big.

Continue reading

Bill O’Reilly: Wrong On Gas Prices

 

Bill O’Reilly has launched a pretty big offensive regarding the price of gasoline.  He’s been on air several times extolling the administration to get ahead of the situation and take a leadership role.  Personally, I’m not sure that Obama has  had much influence on the price of gasoline today.  Prices are high today not because of supply and demand, policies where Obama is clearly wrong, but because of the tension in the Middle East.  Specifically with Iran.

Given the nature of the world market there is no wonder that gasoline prices are going up.  And fast.

But O’Reilly loses me on his solutions.

Continue reading