I'm looking for something I can't get
Broken hearts lie all around me
And I don't see an easy way
To get out of this
--Cutting Crew
Hans-Hermann Hoppe originally proposed these four steps to improve healthcare markets on the cusp of Obamacare approval. At that time, he noted that 'the US healthcare system is a mess.' Since then, it has predictably gotten messier, making his recommendations all the more contemporary.
1) Eliminate all licensing requirements for med schools, hospitals, and healthcare personnel. Licensing decreases healthcare supply and raises barriers to entry and entrepreneurial innovation. If buyers value licensing, then approaches will be developed voluntarily rather than forcibly. No mandatory licensing would also eliminate moral hazard among healthcare consumers and prod buyers to increase their search costs to make more discriminating healthcare choices.
2) Eliminate all government restrictions on production and sale of medicines and medical products. No more FDA. Costs and prices would fall, and more alternatives would enter the market. Sellers would be forced by consumers, rather than governments, to provide product information that buyers value.
3) Deregulate health insurance. Because many aspects of health are within an individual's control, they are uninsurable. Moreover, current laws force insurers to cover people who are poor insurance risks, which distorts the practice of risk pooling that makes insurance an economical endeavor. Deregulation means unrestricted freedom of contract--including capability of insurers to cross state lines for business--a practice that is currently forbidden by law.
4) Eliminate all government subsidies to the sick and unhealthy. ECON 101 tells us that subsidies create more of whatever behavior is being subsidized. Eliminating subsidies, including Medicare and Medicaid, would increase motivation to live healthy lives. It would also create markets for charitable giving and social entrepreneurship (e.g., friendly societies) that withered when voluntary cooperation was crowded out by government force.
Sunday, October 30, 2016
Saturday, October 29, 2016
Reopened
"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."
--V (V for Vendetta)
Yesterday afternoon news hit that the FBI will reopen its investigation into Hillary Clinton's email improprieties. Bureau Director James Comey sent letters to congressional leaders informing them that, based on new evidence that has surfaced in connection to an unrelated case (which appears to be the investigation of former congressman Anthony Weiner whose now estranged wife is a Clinton adviser), the FBI will take "appropriate investigative steps" to review the evidence and its pertinence to the case.
Theories as to why Comey is reopening the case, particularly with the presidential election less than two weeks away, range widely. One theory that personally resonates is that if Comey did not formally reopen the case, then disgruntled agents were going to leak the evidence, thereby forcing his hand.
There is even a theory that suggests Comey remains in the back pocket of the administration and is using this to temporarily distract public attention from the steady stream stream of Wikileaks documents that are increasingly weighing against the Clinton campaign.
It does seem apparent that potential for leaking information, whether is be from Wikileaks, the Bureau, or other sources, is driving bureaucrats to act in manners that are extremely out of the ordinary.
Stated differently, pushing closely held government information out into public view reduces State power and increases social power.
--V (V for Vendetta)
Yesterday afternoon news hit that the FBI will reopen its investigation into Hillary Clinton's email improprieties. Bureau Director James Comey sent letters to congressional leaders informing them that, based on new evidence that has surfaced in connection to an unrelated case (which appears to be the investigation of former congressman Anthony Weiner whose now estranged wife is a Clinton adviser), the FBI will take "appropriate investigative steps" to review the evidence and its pertinence to the case.
Theories as to why Comey is reopening the case, particularly with the presidential election less than two weeks away, range widely. One theory that personally resonates is that if Comey did not formally reopen the case, then disgruntled agents were going to leak the evidence, thereby forcing his hand.
There is even a theory that suggests Comey remains in the back pocket of the administration and is using this to temporarily distract public attention from the steady stream stream of Wikileaks documents that are increasingly weighing against the Clinton campaign.
It does seem apparent that potential for leaking information, whether is be from Wikileaks, the Bureau, or other sources, is driving bureaucrats to act in manners that are extremely out of the ordinary.
Stated differently, pushing closely held government information out into public view reduces State power and increases social power.
Friday, October 28, 2016
Supporting the Unsupportable
President Bennett: It's the old Potomac two-step, Jack.
Jack Ryan: Sorry, Mr President, I don't dance.
--Clear and Present Danger
Judge Nap follows up on yesterday's comments, observing that President Obama has lied directly to the American people, as evidenced in a March 2015 CBS interview, that he did not know about Hillary Clinton's use of a private server for classified government email exchange. Of course, he certainly never expected subsequent information leaks that would challenge his statements.
The judge also notes that information continues to leak from Bureau agents who are furious that Clinton was not prosecuted. "The evidence for indictment and for [Clinton's] prosecution was, remains, and continues to be overwhelming."
That so many individuals appear willing to vote for a person attached to such an evidence trail, not to mention continue their support for the current head of a lawless administration, is a telling reflection of our current state of affairs.
Jack Ryan: Sorry, Mr President, I don't dance.
--Clear and Present Danger
Judge Nap follows up on yesterday's comments, observing that President Obama has lied directly to the American people, as evidenced in a March 2015 CBS interview, that he did not know about Hillary Clinton's use of a private server for classified government email exchange. Of course, he certainly never expected subsequent information leaks that would challenge his statements.
The judge also notes that information continues to leak from Bureau agents who are furious that Clinton was not prosecuted. "The evidence for indictment and for [Clinton's] prosecution was, remains, and continues to be overwhelming."
That so many individuals appear willing to vote for a person attached to such an evidence trail, not to mention continue their support for the current head of a lawless administration, is a telling reflection of our current state of affairs.
Thursday, October 27, 2016
FBI Sideways
There will be no isolation
In our secret separation
--The Fixx
Judge Nap recounts the backstory as we currently know it about the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton. Some of the important dates on the timeline:
Spring 2015. FBI begins investigation into Clinton's use of private email server while serving as Secretary of State and her failure to preserve emails on State Dept servers contrary to federal law.
Summer 2015. After three months of evidence collection and initial interviews, FBI agents and senior managers meet and decide that there is enough evidence to suggest a prima-facie case for espionage, theft of government property, and obstruction of justice. A formal criminal investigation was therefore initiated.
January 2016. The senior FBI agent in charge of the investigation, John Giacalone, resigns from the case and retires from the FBI because he felt the case was going 'sideways'--Bureau-speak for 'going nowhere by design.' His motivation likely included the fact that DOJ and FBI management had decided that the investigation would not employ a federal grand jury. In criminal cases, federal grand juries are the only entities authorized to issue subpoenas for testimony and tangible things. Without a grand jury, Giacalone knew the investigation was toothless.
Spring 2016. It becomes evident to Giacalone's successors that the goal of the FBI was to exonerate Clinton--not to determine that there was enough evidence to indict her.
July 2. Clinton is interviewed following weeks of interviews with others in her inner circle. The interview lasts only four hours and, according to some FBI agents, lacked the aggression, passion, and determination by those conducting the interview that typically accompanies investigations at this level. At this point, several agents conclude similarly to their former boss John Giacolone: the case was going sideways.
July 4. A few frustrated agents contacted the NSA to obtain Hillary Clinton's medial records to verify the gravity of a head injury Clinton claimed limited her ability to recall things during her testimony. After preparing to necessary paperwork to access those records, the agents' request was denied by FBI Director James Comey himself.
July 5. One day after his denial, and in an apparent effort to head off further behind the scenes efforts by frustrated agents, Comey conducts his now famous press conference to announce that Clinton would not be indicted.
October 2016. Wikileaks documents indicate that President Barack Obama regularly communicated with Clinton via her private email server using a pseudonym. Many of these matters were classified. This means that Obama lied when he previously told CBS that he learned about Clinton's servers when the general public did.
This past week. More leaked documents indicate that Andrew McCabe, Giacalone's successor in the investigation and currently No. 3 man at the FBI, is married to a woman who received $675,000 in campaign funds from Clinton sources for a failed 2015 run for the Virginia Senate. James Comey apparently saw no conflict of interest or appearance of impropriety in having a person in charge of the Clinton investigation with that historical relationship.
While more information will hopefully come to light, the picture is already getting pretty clear.
In our secret separation
--The Fixx
Judge Nap recounts the backstory as we currently know it about the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton. Some of the important dates on the timeline:
Spring 2015. FBI begins investigation into Clinton's use of private email server while serving as Secretary of State and her failure to preserve emails on State Dept servers contrary to federal law.
Summer 2015. After three months of evidence collection and initial interviews, FBI agents and senior managers meet and decide that there is enough evidence to suggest a prima-facie case for espionage, theft of government property, and obstruction of justice. A formal criminal investigation was therefore initiated.
January 2016. The senior FBI agent in charge of the investigation, John Giacalone, resigns from the case and retires from the FBI because he felt the case was going 'sideways'--Bureau-speak for 'going nowhere by design.' His motivation likely included the fact that DOJ and FBI management had decided that the investigation would not employ a federal grand jury. In criminal cases, federal grand juries are the only entities authorized to issue subpoenas for testimony and tangible things. Without a grand jury, Giacalone knew the investigation was toothless.
Spring 2016. It becomes evident to Giacalone's successors that the goal of the FBI was to exonerate Clinton--not to determine that there was enough evidence to indict her.
July 2. Clinton is interviewed following weeks of interviews with others in her inner circle. The interview lasts only four hours and, according to some FBI agents, lacked the aggression, passion, and determination by those conducting the interview that typically accompanies investigations at this level. At this point, several agents conclude similarly to their former boss John Giacolone: the case was going sideways.
July 4. A few frustrated agents contacted the NSA to obtain Hillary Clinton's medial records to verify the gravity of a head injury Clinton claimed limited her ability to recall things during her testimony. After preparing to necessary paperwork to access those records, the agents' request was denied by FBI Director James Comey himself.
July 5. One day after his denial, and in an apparent effort to head off further behind the scenes efforts by frustrated agents, Comey conducts his now famous press conference to announce that Clinton would not be indicted.
October 2016. Wikileaks documents indicate that President Barack Obama regularly communicated with Clinton via her private email server using a pseudonym. Many of these matters were classified. This means that Obama lied when he previously told CBS that he learned about Clinton's servers when the general public did.
This past week. More leaked documents indicate that Andrew McCabe, Giacalone's successor in the investigation and currently No. 3 man at the FBI, is married to a woman who received $675,000 in campaign funds from Clinton sources for a failed 2015 run for the Virginia Senate. James Comey apparently saw no conflict of interest or appearance of impropriety in having a person in charge of the Clinton investigation with that historical relationship.
While more information will hopefully come to light, the picture is already getting pretty clear.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Disrespect for the Past
Nathan Algren: What does it say?
Katsumoto: I belong to the warrior in whom the old ways have joined the new.
--The Last Samurai
Some people discount lessons learned in the past as old and out of date. Rather than being an extrapolation of past knowledge and innovation, progress, to these people, begins here and now.
One problem with this position is that it ignores that man has been mining for truth for thousands of years. People from previous generations have unearthed important nuggets that we can learn from. If we do not learn from them, then we must, as it is appropriately said, reinvent the wheel. Why should 'progress' involve having to relearn truths that our ancestors toiled to reveal?
In fact, productivity and the very progress that many of these people seek is bound to suffer as we waste time and other resources REgressing backward to previously trodden paths on the road to truth.
While it is certainly possible to get needlessly hung up in past actions and events, failing to apply truths discovered by our predecessors is wasteful. Considering the capacity of humans to learn by observing others, disrespect for the past amounts to consummate ignorance.
Katsumoto: I belong to the warrior in whom the old ways have joined the new.
--The Last Samurai
Some people discount lessons learned in the past as old and out of date. Rather than being an extrapolation of past knowledge and innovation, progress, to these people, begins here and now.
One problem with this position is that it ignores that man has been mining for truth for thousands of years. People from previous generations have unearthed important nuggets that we can learn from. If we do not learn from them, then we must, as it is appropriately said, reinvent the wheel. Why should 'progress' involve having to relearn truths that our ancestors toiled to reveal?
In fact, productivity and the very progress that many of these people seek is bound to suffer as we waste time and other resources REgressing backward to previously trodden paths on the road to truth.
While it is certainly possible to get needlessly hung up in past actions and events, failing to apply truths discovered by our predecessors is wasteful. Considering the capacity of humans to learn by observing others, disrespect for the past amounts to consummate ignorance.
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Politics and War
"War is a continuation of politics by other means--von Clausewitz."
--Captain Frank Ramsey (Crimson Tide)
Nineteenth century military theorist Carl von Clausewitz famously posited that "war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means." (1976)
Jeff Tucker suggests that rearranging the general's thoughts results in another true proposition: politics is the continuation of warfare by other means.
Politics can be seen as the process of gaining control of the strong arm of government for personal purposes. Politically charged environments therefore crowd out peaceful cooperation in favor of violent force.
Its forcible, decivilizing nature cloaks politics in its warlike character.
References
Clausewitz, C.V. (1976). On war. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
--Captain Frank Ramsey (Crimson Tide)
Nineteenth century military theorist Carl von Clausewitz famously posited that "war is not merely an act of policy but a true political instrument, a continuation of political intercourse carried on with other means." (1976)
Jeff Tucker suggests that rearranging the general's thoughts results in another true proposition: politics is the continuation of warfare by other means.
Politics can be seen as the process of gaining control of the strong arm of government for personal purposes. Politically charged environments therefore crowd out peaceful cooperation in favor of violent force.
Its forcible, decivilizing nature cloaks politics in its warlike character.
References
Clausewitz, C.V. (1976). On war. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Monday, October 24, 2016
Tick Top, Tick Top
Sunday, October 23, 2016
Ma Bell to Marry Pa Cable
Come up off your color chart
I know where you're coming from
--Blondie
It appears that AT&T is buying Time Warner Inc for about $85 billion in cash and stock. The deal would symbolize a long era of consolidation that began not long after AT&T was 'deregulated' and busted up in the 1980s.
Why all of the mergers? For one, cheap credit provides the ultimate consolidation currency. Moreover, there is market power to be had for incumbents seeking to protect their franchises from entrepreneurial entry in this heavily regulated (despite the 'deregulation' claim) sector.
I remember when AOL bought Time Warner for a hefty $182 billion in 2000. Does that mean that AT&T is getting a deal at 50% off? Hardly.
I do wonder whether this deal signifies a coming trend reversal in, for example telecom combos or cheap credit driven buyouts, as did AOL when it top ticked the dot com bubble by paying thru the nose for Time Warner.
I know where you're coming from
--Blondie
It appears that AT&T is buying Time Warner Inc for about $85 billion in cash and stock. The deal would symbolize a long era of consolidation that began not long after AT&T was 'deregulated' and busted up in the 1980s.
Why all of the mergers? For one, cheap credit provides the ultimate consolidation currency. Moreover, there is market power to be had for incumbents seeking to protect their franchises from entrepreneurial entry in this heavily regulated (despite the 'deregulation' claim) sector.
I remember when AOL bought Time Warner for a hefty $182 billion in 2000. Does that mean that AT&T is getting a deal at 50% off? Hardly.
I do wonder whether this deal signifies a coming trend reversal in, for example telecom combos or cheap credit driven buyouts, as did AOL when it top ticked the dot com bubble by paying thru the nose for Time Warner.
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Duverger's Law
"Son, this is a Washington DC kind of lie. It's when the other person knows you're lying, and also knows you know he knows. You follow?"
--Robert Leffingwell (Advise and Consent)
A previous post speculated that there must be research in political science suggesting that in democratic election systems grounded in majority rule (a.k.a. "first past the post") two political parties dominate the ballot. The theoretical principle, it turns out, is called 'Duverger's Law.'
Maurice Duverger was a French sociologist who wrote about the effect in several works in the 1950s (e.g., Duverger, 1954). A quick scan of academic reference databases that I have access to finds dozens if not hundreds of papers evaluating his theory.
After 60+ years of academic testing, Duverger's Law as a general predictor of two party dominance in majority rule election processes still stands.
References
Duverger, M. (1954). Political parties: Their organization and activity in the modern state. New York: Wiley.
--Robert Leffingwell (Advise and Consent)
A previous post speculated that there must be research in political science suggesting that in democratic election systems grounded in majority rule (a.k.a. "first past the post") two political parties dominate the ballot. The theoretical principle, it turns out, is called 'Duverger's Law.'
Maurice Duverger was a French sociologist who wrote about the effect in several works in the 1950s (e.g., Duverger, 1954). A quick scan of academic reference databases that I have access to finds dozens if not hundreds of papers evaluating his theory.
After 60+ years of academic testing, Duverger's Law as a general predictor of two party dominance in majority rule election processes still stands.
References
Duverger, M. (1954). Political parties: Their organization and activity in the modern state. New York: Wiley.
Friday, October 21, 2016
Rigged
The deception, with tact
Just what are you trying to say?
You've got a blank face, which irritates
Communicate, pull out your party piece
--The Fixx
Accusations from Trump and now from WikiLeaks that the US presidential election has been rigged.
Many of the same people have, of course, had no problem challenging the legitimacy of past elections. No issues with seeking to destroy other American 'institutions.'
Perhaps the most delicious irony is that the Clinton campaign, after disparaging Trump for suggesting that the US election is rigged, turns around and suggests that Trump & Co are working with the Russians to...rig the election.
The theatre involved suggests that the lady et al doth protest too much, methinks.
Just what are you trying to say?
You've got a blank face, which irritates
Communicate, pull out your party piece
--The Fixx
Accusations from Trump and now from WikiLeaks that the US presidential election has been rigged.
Cries of blasphemy emanate from the people accused of...doing the rigging, naturally. Such rhetoric is 'dangerous,' they shout. It threatens the American institution of democracy, they drone.There is no US election. There is power consolidation. Rigged primary, rigged media and rigged 'pied piper' candidate drive consolidation.— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) October 21, 2016
Many of the same people have, of course, had no problem challenging the legitimacy of past elections. No issues with seeking to destroy other American 'institutions.'
Perhaps the most delicious irony is that the Clinton campaign, after disparaging Trump for suggesting that the US election is rigged, turns around and suggests that Trump & Co are working with the Russians to...rig the election.
The theatre involved suggests that the lady et al doth protest too much, methinks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vWxrp9meMGN4asJxUkPRQ1pAq70wHTO5R-LiCdBI5VH5hfSW86eVKsUgjEbBjUr0zWCzC0Dlwx_763pXMtOeBIGkR8P5ZE6Tj592odQInuNY_S1txlQjXX86vWkj9UbQ8BZA=s0-d)
