[C]ontrary to what liberals are saying, these technical problems [with Obamacare] are actually a sign of deep problems with the law itself. And I would go further: I think it is the sign of a deeper problem with government intervention in general. This is yet another piece of evidence that no matter how good lawmakers’ intentions are, no matter how much money government spends, government solutions are very likely to fall short of solving most of our problems, and often turn into massive disasters. Government fails to address most problems it tackles because the incentives are arranged in such a way that it favors interest groups and doesn’t reward success or punish failures in the same way as the market does.
15 thoughts on “Quote of the Day”
Comments are closed.
Really … Veronica, please.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2010/apr/01/us-politics-conservative-scholarship
This is your source that explains how an IT failure reflects the governments inability to provide service.
Just amazing.
Yes. Pengun. Really. You are a twit. Aren’t you?
PenGun is unaware of the fact that those three state capitals are also the most reliable Democrat districts in each state. Why ?? Government employees Mr garbage collector. Austin is the only blue district in Texas.
The lefties are trying their usual tactic of ridicule . I don’t think it will work but the low information Obama voter may be immune to logic.
Since this happened in 2010 and the Guardian article talks about VdR preparing a response to NS’ critique, we should be able to fast forward to the end and figure out who had the last word on the subject. Unfortunately, her response is no longer up at the Corner but Silver’s response to that rebuttal is here. Silver dials back the snark considerably in this second post suggesting that there might be unconscious bias instead of the original charge (which Tomasky amplified) that might have been deliberate bias.
I’m thinking that it’s Silver that’s more guilty of running his mouth past the limits of the actual evidence.
Nobody on the left seems to have convincingly refuted Ludwig von Mises 1920 observation that government is incapable of properly calculating a price. Different government projects will be impacted differently by such a disability but it’s fair to say that virtually all of them have some impact. In terms of healthcare in the US, there are a number of known mispriced codes in the Medicare price book that have been that way for decades (since Nixon really). These mispriced codes have led to the US’ tilt towards training specialists over primary care doctors and are a significant contributor to higher medical costs overall.
Before the left gets to Veronique de Rugy, it really ought to deal with the von Mises critique.
The reason traditional governments always bring misery to their subjects is because they become the sole provider of selected goods and services. Although the best governments can provide these daily goods and services adequately or even superbly, occasionally something goes wrong and the provision of a particular good or service stops. Nothing is available to the masses and only the ruling class get what they need.
For example, during the shutdown food stamp cards could not be used to buy food. Suddenly, millions of Americans, who depended on these cards, slowly began to starve to death.
Imagine mass starvation in modern day America actually took place! Fortunately Wal Mart stepped up and fed the masses. There was not enough charity available because the Feds had eliminated traditional charities.
The glory of a free market system is that someone is always ready to step in and provide a good or service at a price. This role is often performed by charities. But if socialism crowds out charities and makes profiteering illegal, then when the governmemt accidently stops delivering food and medical care, starvation and pestilence take over.
There is always someone in a Free Markets who anticipates changes that affect the supply and delivery of goods and services (except when prohibited by government regulations). In a free market there are thousands of plans competing with each other. Governments often fail because they have only 1 plan plus a contingency plan. Only governmemt can fix a government mistake.
The difference btween Progressives and the Tea Party is that progressives believe that governments should be lead the nation and plan the future; Tea Party believes the government should let markets work freely to provide goods and servicees and that the gocernment should act as a referee calling fouls and penalizing players who break the rules.
The games that make up life are ruined when the referees take over the game, call the plays, decide who plays and who scores. Worse happens when the referees decide that nobody loses.
“Worse happens when the referees decide that nobody loses.”
Grey Eagle, I think you mean when the referees decide that nobody wins except the referees.
“The games that make up life are ruined when the referees take over the game, call the plays, decide who plays and who scores. Worse happens when the referees decide that nobody loses.” says Grey Eagle.
I believe I’ve read only off-the-cuff (satiric-conspiratorial) comments on Justice Roberts’ decisions re. the legality of the Obamacare program, shortly after the court found it constitutional. Has there been any subsequent revelations about possible sources of influence (outside of constitutional law) on the justice? It still seems peculiar and has that “Alice in Wonderland” aura about it, to me anyway.
The idea that whether or not the medical scheme of the current regime works is meaningful is a fundamental error.
The law was passed in order for people to become acclimated to the idea of government run health care on a society wide scale instead of only for seniors or the poor.
If it fails, the answer will always be to expand and spend more on the scheme. If it is successful, and the party narrative will always be that it is successful, the obvious next step is to expand the scheme and spend more money on it to improve it and make it even better than the wonder of the ages it has proven itself to be.
The author cited above is looking for rationality—this is a futile search. All that matters in this case, and all that ever matters in the progressive/statist/collectivist world, is ideological purity.
And the ideology calls for the state to operate the health care system.
The actual outcomes for those involved as patients or doctors or others within the system are meaningless. All that matters is that the prog cadres acquire the necessary power and resources to carry out their program.
That, i.e., power and resource acquisition, is the only true standard of success or failure.
Medically related results, for good or ill, are irrelevant.
Jeff,
These days it’s more like the refs spend the game collecting bribes to determine the outcome.
Tyouth,we are dealing with thugs. It is quite possible that Judge Roberts’ was subjected to threats to his family, or else datamining found material for blackmail. Certainly his Obamacare opinion was ludicrous.
Obama might have been less successful in the last few years if capitalists had more pride and faith in the open market; but of course appeasing the government in no bid contracts is lucrative and it isn’t just that businessmen can be venal, businesses have a duty not to self-destruct. (Though one might think the insurance companies would be aware the tobacco the administration offered was going to be carcinogenic.)
Popular culture’s assault on business may have softened a country that seems less appalled by the assaults on oil, guitar factories, coal, the mildly oppositional press, etc. through the IRS, the EPA, CIA, etc. than any one a couple of generations ago (outside of pop cultures other central meme of paranoia – but that by businesses & not government) would have thought.
Surely Roberts wasn’t blackmailed – if he was than we are even farther down the road to serfdom than I’d thought. But, then, my friend was pointing out the tactics that got Bill Gates out of his apparently apolitical (if capitalist) world and into the left’s.
Someday people will learn the lesson of biology: no centralization. Fundamentalist Christians aren’t the only one in denial about evolution. Soviets made war on Darwin, too: socialists back then were honest about their anti-scientific ideology. Now they conceal it with lies.
The fantastic adaptiveness of life around us was not driven by a designer implementing a plan with total control. Life is out of control. Free. That is nature’s way; it is god’s way; it is the right way. The monarchist/socialist/nazi/communist/liberal/Democrat with plans of centralized control will immiserate, will murder, and will fail.
They cannot conceive of a system without themselves as the Great Helmsman. They desire power to satisfy their perverted natures. That is why they admire Mao (as Obama and Ayers do), Castro, Hitler, Chavez, et. al. and are indifferent to the suffering they cause.
“The cause of all these evils was the desire for power, which greed and ambition inspire,” – Thucydides.
Every good cause eventually becomes a racket. This is lost on the political left, even some of my children.