Archive for the ‘Government and Politics’ category

The R’s And D’s Are On The Same Side – We Are On The Other Side

October 13, 2017

What do I mean when I use the term R’s and D’s?  I am talking about party insiders in positions of power in DC, and insiders who have direct access to the people in these positions of power. I’m not talking about you and me. We are outside the party structure. We are only important to the insider R’s and D’s on election day.

The trick for each party is to get voters (you and me) to think the insiders of the other party are the wolfs, while at the same time portraying themselves as the sheepdog. Unfortunately we have bought into this trick. In reality the R’s and the D’s both want government power to grow. Increasing government power benefits insiders of both parties. When Government grows you and I are forced to give up our freedom and our money. Insiders will choose any policy that increases the power of Government.

We are reaching a point where enough of us are finally realizing that the battle is between us and the insiders of both parties. We should be fighting them not each other.

I found these cartoons of Ralph E. Wolf and Sam Sheepdog. It shows the R and D political model that we have been duped into accepting. Ralph E Wolf and Sam Sheepdog seem to be on opposite sides. But they are on the same side. Each one is just playing his role at any given moment.

 

 

Related ArticleFiscal Cliff or Political Theater, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleA Look Behind The Curtain At The Fiscal Cliff Political Theater, The Joke’s On You! at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleBurger King, Corporate Tax Inversions, and Political Theater, at austrianaddict.com.

Advertisements

Good Cops Shouldn’t Tolerate Bad Cops

September 15, 2017

When a video like the one below surfaces the tendency is to say all cops are like this. Even though this video blows my mind at how stupid this cop is, I will not paint all cops with the broad brush this bad cop has placed in my hand. Not all cops are like this.

When you watch this video you will notice the other police officers, not the security guards, seem a little uncomfortable with the action this cop has taken. I think the cop whose body camera filmed this video is trying to figure out how to get out of the mess that the out of control cop has created. So why do regular cops seem to stick up for bad cops? Don’t they know that their silence about the bad cop is seen as support by default? Their inaction is in fact an action.

If you drag this video to 11:00 you will see an officer, who I think is of higher rank than the arresting officer, try to smooth over the situation. The higher ranking officer is using verbal gymnastics and a calm voice to try to confuse the nurse. He is trying to convince her that his fellow officer is in the right and the nurse is wrong. But the Nurse is right. The cops need a warrant or the person’s consent to draw blood.

When you watch the video. Try to put yourself in the nurses shoes. Try to put yourself in the arresting officers shoes, if you can. But try to put yourself in the shoes of the cop who is filming this. What would you have done if a colleague of yours acted like this?

GROUP IDENTITY

I don’t understand the mentality of sticking up for a person in your “identity group” who is not just being an ass, but is not following the rule of law. I am a white male but I have no problem saying that another white male is dead wrong. The difference is I don’t think of myself as a member of a group consisting of white males. I think of myself as an individual. For some reason people find their identity from being a member of a particular group. When you identify yourself as a member of a group and not as an individual, you have to look at criticism of another member of the group as being an attack on the whole group, and therefore an attack on you.

Each of us is a member of many groups at once. We are members of the particular family we were born into. We are male or female. We are a particular race. We have a particular religion or no religion. We work in a particular profession. We have particular hobbies. We are American or from another country. We are a Democrat, a Republican or neither. There are many groups we can choose to identify with. And that’s when the problem starts. We paint ourselves into corners that are hard to escape if our identity comes from a group. You can identify as an individual even though you are a member of many different groups. You don’t have to defend the bad people in ‘the’ group if you think of yourself as an individual first.

Watch the video. Put yourself in the nurses shoes. Put yourself in the arresting cops shoes, if that’s possible. But try to put yourself in the shoes of the cop who is filming this. What would you have done if a colleague acted like this?

 

Sheriff Forced To Pay After Ordering Raid On Blogger Who Criticized Him, at reason.com. This Sheriff should have been fired. Because of his position as sheriff, he had to know he was breaking the law. Since he is in a position of power, he should only get one strike and he’s out. It is not about him as much as it is about constraining other’s in positions of power who want to wield it against citizens.

Police Devise New Revenue Scam By Citing People Who Forget To Press Crosswalk Button, at thefreethoughtproject.com. These are the kind of petty rules that make people dislike cops. City councils should get rid of laws like this.

Forget The Violent Campus Protests – This College Cop Is Gunning For Unlicensed Hot Dog Vendors, at reason.com. Another example of a law that should not be on the books. Cops should be policing real crimes.

Police Serve Warrant To Wrong Address, Kill Man Who Lives There, at reason.com. I know that men are not perfect. We all make mistakes. But can you be sure you are at the right address! Put yourself in the shoes of the person whose door was broken down. Should the cops rules of engagement be like the military’s rules of engagement? Don’t fire until fired upon. Would a different type of person be attracted to the job if this was the rule of engagement?

The Drug Whisperer’: Drivers Arrested While Stoned Cold Sober, at wltx.com. The cop is smarter than the ‘science’ of a blood test? This has to be a violation of a persons fourth and fifth amendment rights.

What Can Happen When You Try To File A Complaint Against Police Officers

There are millions of contacts between citizens and police each day. The vast majority turn out just fine. The bad situations are not the norm. But just because the bad situations are not the norm doesn’t mean they should to be swept under the rug by the people who are supposed to investigate them.

The video below shows cops attempting to stop complaints against their fellow officers from even being filed. These cops use straw man arguments, intimidation, lying, verbal sleight of hand, and force to stop people from filing complaints. By letting the bad cops go unpunished the bad behaviour is incentivized.

This video shows how people act when they identify themselves as members of a group and not as an individual.

If cops want to identify themselves as a group, people are going to gladly give them their wish. People will begin to identify all cops by the lowest common denominator of the group.

Cops have to purge themselves of their bad apples. Or their credibility will continue to erode.

the

Democrat and Republican Establishments vs. Healthcare

July 18, 2017

 

Private or Public - Traffic sign with two options - services and companies owned by state or private businessman. Socialist / Capitalist question of privatization, school system, health service

The grass roots of the Democrat party is trying to pull the party toward an ideology of a centrally planned socialist economy. The grass roots of the Republican party is trying to pull the party toward an ideology of individual freedom and free markets. The establishment leadership of both parties only pay lip service to the ideologies of their grass roots base, because the status quo leadership of both parties wants two things. 1) They want to protect and grow the power of government. 2) Each wants to be the majority party that wields this Government power.

The ideology of the grass roots is a petty annoyance that has to be finessed politically in order to cobble together a 51% majority to gain control of the levers of power. You can see this playing out in the current healthcare issue.

The establishment Republicans in congress want no part of getting rid of Obamacare and replacing it with a free market in healthcare. Grass roots want government to get out of the healthcare industry and allow the best possible solutions to be spontaneously created by individuals cooperating in a free market. This article; DISGUSTING New Senate Healthcare Bill Adds Back Taxes That Were Originally Eliminated, at economicpolicyjournal.com. shows the Republican establishment for what it is. It’s a party giving big government favors (at taxpayer expense) to people who fund their reelections. This is being disguised as solutions to our current healthcare problems. The original problems in healthcare were caused, in the first place, by government intervention into the free market over the last 100 years. (Read: New Government Healthcare Regulations will Not Cure The Results Of Previous Government Regulations.)

The Democrat party is having a similar problem in California. The establishment of the party had an opportunity recently to pass a single payer healthcare system. When they didn’t pass the bill, the grass roots of the party started to rebel because they want government run healthcare. This article; California Democratic Party Civil War Underway, at cacus99percent.com. shows that even the Democrat establishment realizes a single payer system isn’t workable and will bankrupt the state.

So are the grass roots of the Democrat party and the establishment of the Republican party fighting for the same thing? The Republican establishment wants more government intervention in healthcare than the grass roots constituents of their party, and the grass roots Democrats want more government intervention in healthcare than members of the establishment in their party. Although they differ in the degree of government intervention, I think, California grass roots Democrats and establishment Republicans agree with the direction healthcare is moving. And similarly and grass roots Republicans and California establishment Democrats disagree with moving in that direction.

SO WHERE ARE WE?

We’re in a mess? The first thing I want to clear up is this point. There are no “solutions” to the problems in healthcare. There are only trade offs or tolerable bests that exist. Why do I say this? Because healthcare is an economic good. Which means it is a scarce. It doesn’t exist in abundance. It has to be produced by someone before it can be consumed. It is not like the air we breathe. Everyone on the planet can breathe as much air as they want because it exists naturally in abundance. It doesn’t have to be produced by anyone before it can be consumed. Some might say “I pay for the air I put in my tires”. Yes you do, but you are not paying for the air. They are paying the cost of compressing the air. Compressed air in particular is an economic good, air is not.

As much as some would like to believe healthcare is a right, saying it is a right doesn’t make the reality that is a scarce economic good magically disappear. Because of this fact, there has to be a way of rationing healthcare because there is not enough to satisfy the demand for it. There are two ways to ration economic goods. Through prices in a free market, or by bureaucrats in a central planned government system.

WHY HAS THE PRICE OF HEALTHCARE SKYROCKETED?

You have to look no further than the law of supply and demand to figure out the answer to this question. What do I mean? On the one hand every regulation passed by politicians and bureaucrats concerning healthcare over the last 100 years works to restrict the supply of healthcare. When supply is decreased against a fixed demand the price will increase. On the other hand politicians and bureaucrats are using tax payer dollars to subsidize healthcare which increases demand. When demand increases against a fixed supply the price will go up.

Bureaucratic intervention into the healthcare market by government has worked to decrease supply and increase demand over the last 100 years. We don’t have to look any farther than the law of supply and demand to understand why the price of healthcare has increased.

Over the last few decades the price of healthcare has gone up exponentially. Politicians see this increase but instead of getting rid of the policies that caused the increase, they try to to shift the increased costs of healthcare to the tax payers or insurance policy holders. But shifting costs doesn’t cut costs. In fact, shifting the cost increases costs because the only people who have an incentive to keep costs down are the people who pay them.

REPLACE WITH WHAT?

The truth is a free market is the only way the lowest possible price can be discovered. Healthcare can never be “free” because it is an economic good. Third party payers and cost shifting schemes distort supply and demand information. This distortion increases the costs above what they would be in a free market. Replacing Obamacare with a different set of government regulations won’t work. The only thing that can bring down costs is a free market in healthcare.

Unfortunately most people have a hard time wrapping their head around the abstract concept of a spontaneous order of a market vs. the seemingly concrete plans by central planners.

Having an order formed by individuals cooperating and competing inside of laws concerning property, contract and tort, allows for trial and error of multiple ideas by millions of people. The best way of doing something will be discovered and imitated.

A top down order formed by bureaucrats making plans that boxes individuals inside of narrow rules limits the amount of knowledge that can be brought to bare in discovering the best possible way of doing something. It also makes it almost impossible to change direction when the one and only plan is obviously not working. Just look at our present situation.

SOLUTION

Remember there are no solutions to healthcare, just trade offs. There is only one way to get to a point where individuals actually can make the decisions about the trade offs concerning healthcare. Get Government out of healthcare.

Since the grass-roots and the establishment of the Democrat party is never going to allow a free market in healthcare, the only chance is to help the grass-roots of the Republican party purge their party of the establishment leadership in their party and replace them with members who understand how free markets work. Repealing and replacing members of the Republican establishment takes consistent effort over many election cycles. Just look at what has happened to the shift in political power since the Democrats ruled all three branches of Government, most state houses and most governorships in 08 (read here).

 

Related ArticleSpontaneous Order = Free Market Economy, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleSpontaneous Order More Complex Than Top Down Planning.

Related ArticleSpontaneous Order Utilizes More Knowledge than Central Planning Could Ever Hope To Utilize.

Is The Recent Georgia Run Off Election A Portent For The 2018 Midterms?

June 29, 2017

Infographic model of USA congressional votes. Editable Sample.

The recent Georgia 6th district win by (R) Handel over (D) Ossoff was spun as a good omen by each side for their chances in the 2018 midterm congressional elections. We’re not going to make any predictions about 2018 because the election is a year and a half out and a lot can happen in an instant which can change the political landscape. So let’s analyze some numbers that exist today, and also look at some possible situations which may, or might not, influence 2018. Do you like the words may and might? These words suggest a subjective opinion. But the numbers are objective.

ANALYZING SOME NUMBERS

-A party needs 218 seats in the house to gain control. The D’s hold 193 seats. The D’s need to defeat 25 incumbant R’s, and win all 193 seats they presently hold to win control of the House.

-The D’s will need 51 seats to gain control of the senate because the Vice President (Pence) is the tie breaking vote. 34 senate seats are being contested in 2018. Of the 34 seats, 25 are held by D’s and 9 by R’s. So the D’s need to defeat 3 incumbant R’s and win all 25 seats they presently hold to win the House.

-The D’s thought they had a chance to flip the congressional seat in Georgia. They spent a record amount of money for one congressional seat. ( Democrats Get Crushed In Georgia Election Despite 7x Spending Advantage.) If they need to flip 25 seats held by the R’s in the House and 3 seats in the Senate, are they going to have enough money to fund each of these campaigns? But in order to win the minimum number of seats to win back the House and Senate they are going to have to target more than the minimum number (25 & 3), because losing just one seat spells doom.

-The D’s think that Hillary winning the popular vote by 2.86 million shows the majority of people agree with their vision for America. But if you look at California, New York and Massachusetts you get a different view of the numbers. Hillary won California by 4.27 million votes. She won New York by 1.74 million votes. She won Massachusetts by 1.0 Million votes. That is a 7.01 million vote advantage in three states. But it also means she lost the other 47 states by 4.15 million votes. If you take the .8 million advantage the R’s had in Texas the number shrinks to 3.35 million. Still the R’s have a broader base of support, while the D’s support is concentrated.

-The D’s hold a total of 193 house seats. Of those 39 are in California, 18 are in New York and 9 are in Massachusetts. So 66, or 34%, of their house seats are from these three states. This means they have 127 seats spread across 47 states. In most of these house seats the incumbant has an advantage because these districts have been gerrymandered. It may be difficult for the D’s to find enough competitive seats to win back the house.

-R’s control both chambers in 33 states, while D’s control both chambers in 13 states with 4 state chambers being split. (The R’s also have 33 state governors) The party in power in each state will be able to redraw the house districts after the 2020 census. The D’s have to win back control of some of these state chambers or it will be  more difficult to win control of the house after 2020.

-What about the senate? I’ve read (here) that R’s Flake from Arizona, Heller from Nevada and Cruz from Texas are vulnerable. But if the D’s don’t win all 25 of the seats they are defending, it doesn’t matter if they win these three seats. Of the 25 seats D’s have to defend, 12 are listed as vulnerable. But 10 of these are in states that voted for Trump in 2016. They are Nelson-Fla, Connelly-In, McCaskill-Mo, Tester-Mt, Heitkamp-ND, Brown-Oh, Casey-Penn, Manchin-WV, Baldwin-Wi and Stebenow-Mi.

CONCLUSION

Mathematically the D’s have an uphill battle to regain control of the house and the senate. But the unknown future is what will ultimately decide 2018. What are some of these unknown events that could affect political change? We can only speculate what they will be. Here are some of my speculations.

BIASED SPECULATION ABOUT UNKNOWN FUTURE EVENTS

(AKA MY BEST GUESSES)

-The economy will be the most important issue. As we know from history the economy, or the perception of how good or bad the economy is, will be at the top issue for each individual voter. The economy is not healthy right now. The financial bubble created by the Federal Reserve is over leveraged with a mountain of debt. The Fed is in the process of raising interest rates. It is also in the process of reducing Its balance sheet. This means it is not rolling over (refinancing) as much previous debt. Money is not being pumped into the financial market like it was when the Fed was in QE mode. This will eventually lead to a correction (recession). A recession is needed to correct the previous monetary interventions by the Federal Reserve over the last ten years. The Fed would like this correction to happen during Trump’s presidency because it thinks it will be able to deflect the blame away from its previous monetary policies and push the blame on Trump. They know the mainstream media will help with the blame game. The other thing that will help the Fed get away with this is the ignorance of the citizens when it comes to Fed policies.

The quote by Keynes on the top right of my web site says it all: “There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose.

-Will Healthcare be an issue in 2018? Yes. But the people who got hammered under Obamacare because of the increased insurance costs, didn’t vote for Trump, as much as they voted against continuing Obamacare under a Clinton presidency. do you really think these voters will, 2 years after the fact, go back to the party that crushed them financially? I don’t think these voters will, 2 years after the fact, go back to the party that crushed them financially even if the R’s don’t repeal Obamacare, or pass a bill that is spun as a repeal of Obamacare, but really isn’t. These voters know the D’s have destroyed our healthcare system with Obamacare. They also know the D’s want to implement a single payer government run system. These  voters in the other 47 States know their only hope is to try to force the wimps in the R party to get rid of the policy that raised their health premiums higher than what they could afford. These people have been backed into a corner. And when an individual has been backed into a corner he will will fight because he has no other choice.

-The mainstream media has lost, and is continuing to lose, credibility. They don’t have the power they, and we, think they possess. If they had this kind of power, Trump wouldn’t have won the election. They won’t be successful in pushing the big government progressive propaganda of the left. I don’t think they realize what people outside of California, New York, Massachusetts and D.C. think of them. Many people see them as biased. There is enough access to information that most people don’t have to be propagandized anymore unless they want to be. They won’t be successful in pushing the big government progressive propaganda of the left as they were decades ago.

CONCLUSION

Your guess is as good as mine!

 

Related ArticleNew Gov. Healthcare Regulations Will Not Cure The Results Of Previous Gov. Regulations, at austrianaddict.com.

Related Article0% Interest Rate x Eight Years = The Fed’s ZIRP Doesn’t Work, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleBias In The Unbiased Mainstream Media, at austrianaddict.com.

 

Please See Through The Politicization Of Every “Serious Crisis”

June 14, 2017

Vector hand drawn Politician concept sketch. Politician standing on globe and playing with small people as puppets

Every time there is a shooting, one of my articles titled; “You Never Let A Serious Crisis Go To Waste”, gets a lot of views.  The post talked about the politicization of the Sandy Hook shootings by President Obama just 6 hours after the shootings.

The shootings by an individual at an early morning baseball practice today of House and Senate Republicans who were preparing for tomorrows charity game against House and Senate Democrats, brought out some of the usual suspects who were trying to make political hay out of a crisis. Here is what the Governor of Virginia, Terry McAuliffe, had to say about the situation. It took him less than a minute to ‘never let a serious crisis go to waste’.

Here is an excerpt from the video: “……let me say this; I think we need to do more to protect all of our citizens. I have long advocated, this is not what today is about, but there are too many guns on the street. We loose 93  million Americans a day to gun violence and I’ve long talked about this. Back ground checks, shutting down gun show loop holes, that’s not for today’s discussion. But it’s not just about politicians, we worry about this every day for all of our citizens.”

A reporter then asked a great question; But if it’s not the day for it, why are you bringing it up at this time?”

A reporter then asked what I thought would be an obvious question; “….sir did you say 93 million, that’s a big number?”  McAuliffe corrected his “obvious mistake” about the number of Americans “lost a day to gun violence” from 93 million to just 93 individuals a day.

NEVER LET A SERIOUS CRISIS TO WASTE

McAuliffe made a subjective decision that his political agenda concerning gun control was more important than anything else he could have talked about when questioned after the situation. At that moment in time he decided his best course of action was to say what he said. His action tells us all we need to know about him. His subjective decision allowes us to judge him objectively.

Here is an excerpt from my article; “You Never Let A Serious Crisis Go To Waste”.

“The full quote, “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.” is by Rahm Emanuel, former White House Chief of Staff under President Obama. This reflects the thinking of Saul Alinsky, who wrote “Rules for Radicals.” “Rules for Radicals” is the default position the President, and Emanuel operate under. If you understand this, it will be easier to analyse everything they say and do.”

“Here is the template. 1) Use a tragedy as a crisis, or create a crisis where none exists. 2) Paint the crisis with as much emotion as possible, and throw logical analysis out the window. 3) Propose the one and only solution to the problem, which just happens to coincide with what you’ve wanted to implement for many years. 4) Paint anyone who opposes your one and only solution as evil, uncaring, not smart enough to understand the nuanced brilliance of your solution, or in the pockets of …. you pick the evil entity. 5) Force the solution on the people by any means, whether legislatively, by executive order, or through the legal system. 6) When the unintended consequences of your solution rear their ugly head, use them as a reason for more brilliant solutions to made up crises.”

“Forgive my cynicism, but, when I heard the President’s emotional address on the radio about six hours after the shootings in Connecticut, I thought about the “Rules for Radicals” template. “You never let a serious crisis go to waste” is in full operation, because this is who politicians are in general, and who the President is in particular. Politics is the world in which they operate, and the lens through which they view everything. Because of this underlying reality, and because they have the power of Government behind them enforcing their edicts, you should never trust what they say or do, and always question their motives.”

CONCLUSION

Politics is going to be played on both sides of this “crisis”. We have to be smart enough to see through the political BS. I just want to point out that this political game we have been dragged into is a losers game for us. Politicians are the only ones who win when we allow them to split us up into groups, and then pit these groups against each other. Groups don’t act. Only individuals can act. Is there pattern prediction of individuals belonging to certain groups? Yes. But this particular individual shooter is probably an outlier and not part of any group pattern. At least let’s hope so!

 

Related ArticleHuman Action Reveals The Reality About Political Decisions, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleMises’ “Human Action” Explains Lies About Libya, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleLet’s Think About The Shutdown, The Debt Ceiling, And Obamacare, at austrianaddict.com.

Let California And New York Try Single Payer Socialized Healthcare Before We Adopt It Nationally.

May 31, 2017

 

conceptual sign with words not so affordable care act ahead over blue sky

California and NY are in the process of implementing state government run single payer healthcare systems. We should not take any action on National healthcare laws until the results of these two State experiments are known. These articles; “California Single-Payer Bill Puts Dems In Tough Position“, and “New York’s Single-Payer Health Care Plan Would Be More Expensive Than Hew York’s Entire State Government“, talk about the costs that would torpedo the budgets of each state if these bills get implemented.

Obamacare is in the process of collapsing. You probably won’t believe this but, it was designed to collapse. Listen to Jonathan Gruber admit what Obamacare was designed to do (click here to watch clip). Obamacare was supposed to be the next step toward the implementation of a government run single payer healthcare system.

The true test of whether a theory or policy works as advertised is the passage of time. Time will bear out whether something works or fails. The incrementalism of government intervention into the healthcare market over the last 90 years has brought us to this point in time. We have a 90 year test of time to judge if government regulations have produced their intended consequences. The verdict is in. These policies have failed.

But instead of politicians and bureaucrats in government choosing to repeal the regulations that produced bad results, politicians and bureaucrats passed new regulations in an attempt to address the results caused by their previous intervention into the healthcare market (click here New Gov. Healthcare Regulations Will Not Cure The Results Of Previous Gov. Regulations).

Every new regulation designed to ‘fix’ the results of previous regulations reduces options available to consumers and producers of healthcare. The pricing system of the market is distorted. Information about the production and consumption of healthcare is transmitted through the system via market prices. Decisions are made using this false information. Results of decisions using false information can’t possibly turn out well because decision makers are flying blind. This is why Obamacare is collapsing. There is no true pricing system.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH HEALTHCARE?

1)No new regulations should be passed.

2)The Senate should squash the House repeal and replace bill.

3)The consequences of Obamacare should be allowed happen over time.

4)We should allow the passage of time to show us if the single payer systems of New York and California work to cut costs (truly cut costs not shift costs somewhere else) and increase coverage.

CONCLUSION

We have an opportunity to find out whether Government run single payer healthcare is the system that provides the best possible coverage at the lowest possible cost.

Even though waiting a few more years to see the results will increase costs, we should wait to witness reality. The increased cost of waiting will be less than the cost of making a premature decision to implement a government run single payer system that we will be stuck with forever no matter how bad it fails.

Related ArticleHealthcare: Market Solutions vs. Bureaucratic Decrees, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleHow Would Government Run Healthcare Work? Look At The VA. at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleLet’s Look At Government Run Healthcare, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThe Economics Of Health Care vs, The Right To Healthcare, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleThe Reality Of Obamacare: Socialism By Installments, at austrianaddict.com.

New Gov. Healthcare Regulations Will Not Cure The Results Of Previous Gov. Regulations

May 16, 2017

Politicians and bureaucrats are manipulated the masses into believing our healthcare costs can magically be lowered by bureaucratic edicts backed by the force of government. But our political betters fail to mention the high costs of today’s healthcare is a result of previous edicts by politicians and bureaucrats.

The reason we have been so easily manipulated is because, “ We’re All Born In The Middle Of The Story” (click here). Most people think history started the day they were born. They give little thought, or have no understanding of how the world that existed the day they were born came to exist as it did. Where we are today is the result of interventionist decisions made in the distant and recent past by individuals in government which affected previous decisions made voluntarily by individuals in what we can safely call our hampered (free) market system.

GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION INTO HEALTHCARE

How did we arrive at our current “healthcare crisis”? This article by Mike Holly titled How Government Regulations Made Healthcare So Expensive, gives a brief history of how political and bureaucratic intervention, backed by the force of government, has led to our current healthcare mess.

Government intervention, starting in the early 1900’s, has worked to restrict the supply of and increase the demand for healthcare. The result of restricting supply and increasing demand is higher prices. Since the previous interventions of politicians and bureaucrats have increased the cost, the present politicians and bureaucrats are trying to shift the costs to the already insured and to the taxpayers.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

“In 1910, the physician oligopoly was started during the Republican administration of William Taft after the American Medical Association lobbied the states to strengthen the regulation of medical licensure and allow their state AMA offices to oversee the closure or merger of nearly half of medical schools and also the reduction of class sizes. The states have been subsidizing the education of the number of doctors recommended by the AMA.”

  • “In 1925, prescription drug monopolies begun after the federal government led by Republican President Calvin Coolidge started allowing the patenting of drugs. (Drug monopolies have also been promoted by government research and development subsidies targeted to favored pharmaceutical companies.)”
  • “In 1945, buyer monopolization begun after the McCarran-Ferguson Act led by the Roosevelt Administration exempted the business of medical insurance from most federal regulation, including antitrust laws. (States have also more recently contributed to the monopolization by requiring health care plans to meet standards for coverage.)”
  • “In 1946, institutional provider monopolization begun after favored hospitals received federal subsidies (matching grants and loans) provided under the Hospital Survey and Construction Act passed during the Truman Administration. (States have also been exempting non-profit hospitals from antitrust laws.)”
  • “In 1951, employers started to become the dominant third-party insurance buyer during the Truman Administration after the Internal Revenue Service declared group premiums tax-deductible.”
  • “In 1965, nationalization was started with a government buyer monopoly after the Johnson Administration led passage of Medicare and Medicaid which provided health insurance for the elderly and poor, respectively.”
  • “In 1972, institutional provider monopolization was strengthened after the Nixon Administration started restricting the supply of hospitals by requiring federal certificate-of-need for the construction of medical facilities.”
  • “In 1974, buyer monopolization was strengthened during the Nixon Administration after the Employee Retirement Income Security Act exempted employee health benefit plans offered by large employers (e.g., HMOs) from state regulations and lawsuits (e.g., brought by people denied coverage).”
  • “In 1984, prescription drug monopolies were strengthened during the Reagan Administration after the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act permitted the extension of patents beyond 20 years. (The government has also allowed pharmaceuticals companies to bribe physicians to prescribe more expensive drugs.)”
  • “In 2003, prescription drug monopolies were strengthened during the Bush Administration after the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act provided subsidies to the elderly for drugs.”
  • “In 2014, nationalization will be strengthened after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (“Obamacare”) provided mandates, subsidies and insurance exchanges, and the expansion of Medicaid.”

“The history of medical cost inflation and government interference in health care markets appears to support the hypothesis that prices were set by the laws of supply and demand before 1980 and perhaps 1990. Even the degree of monopolization and nationalization promoted by politicians before 1965 was not enough to cause significant cost inflation and spending increases (Figure 2) until demands created by Medicare and Medicaid outstripped the restricted supply of physicians and hospitals.”

WHAT HAPPENS NOW?

Can we get back to a free market healthcare system, or are we going to end up with a government-run single payer system? The passage of time means there will always be change, so no one can predict where this ends because nothing is ever final. We had a free market healthcare system at one point in time. But eventually politicians and bureaucrats granted monopoly status to doctor licensing boards, medical schools, drug companies, and insurance companies, on the one hand, and subsidized the use of healthcare on the other. The incremental change over time was hardly noticeable. But decades later we are close to a government-run wingle payer healthcare system.

Now that “One-Third Of Americans Are On Government Healthcare” (click here), it will be difficult to get rid of this “entitlement”. We’ve already heard the Democrats talking about how all the people who have health insurance because of Obamacare, will lose it under the Republican replace bill. They neglect to tell you about how the increased premiums of the already insured, plus taxpayer subsidies are paying for it (That which is seen and that which is not seen – Bastiat).

If you add the entitlement of government granted monopoly positions in the supply of healthcare we can see that moving away from government central planning of healthcare and toward a free market in healthcare will be difficult. Change will happen either incrementally or categorically.

The American Healthcare Act (click here to see what is in the bill), passed by the Republican controlled house, is an attempt to incrementally repeal and replace Obamacare. It is not a very good attempt. Republican leaders can only muster enough courage to try incremental change at this point. The Republican bill is not enough to change the direction on the road we are traveling.

I think categorical change is the only thing that will turn us around and get us headed in the other direction. The inevitable collapse of our present healthcare system will bring about the opportunity for this categorical change back toward a free market healthcare system. The scary part about a collapse, is it also presents the opportunity for central planners to attempt the implementation of a government-run single payer healthcare system. How do we make sure a free market, and not a government run system, will rise from the ashes of a healthcare collapse?

PEOPLE HAVE TO BE EDUCATED ABOUT THE WHOLE STORY

Being born in the middle of the story doesn’t mean we have to be ignorant about the whole story. The election of Trump, or the rejection of the status quo embodied by Hillary, shows people instinctively know something is wrong with our healthcare system. Trump ran on the repeal and replacement of Obamacare. The fact that people instinctively know something is wrong provides an opportunity to help them understand how government regulations have led to our current healthcare system. How our current healthcare system is not a free market system. How more regulations are not the solution. How the best answer to our failing healthcare system is to allow free market solutions, which means getting rid of existing government healthcare regulations.

Growing numbers of people know something is wrong. They have to understand how we arrived at this point in time. Because when they are faced with the categorical decision between single payer or free market they won’t be fooled by political demagoguery.

Here are some articles about free market solutions for healthcare.

The Bill To Permanently Fix Healthcare For All. at market-ticker-.org

A Four Step Healthcare Solution. at mises.org.

The Impossible Healthcare Solution: Go Back To Cash. at oftwominds.org.

 

Related ArticleHealthcare: Market Solutions vs. Bureaucratic Decrees, at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleHow Would Government Run Healthcare Work? Look At The VA. at austrianaddict.com.

Related ArticleLet’s Look At Government Run Healthcare, at austrianaddict.com.