| Jump to bottom |
Should Washington dictate breast exams
Washington should not dictate breast exams. Neither should the government get into the health insurance business and pay for breast exams.
The problem is that we need to free our free markets in order to improve the health insurance industry.
Why are "we conservatives" not arguing that more free-market competition in the health insurance industry is what is needed? Lobbyist and special interest groups have bought off our representatives in Washington. There is no other logical answer.
A major argument of liberals for advocating a public sector health insurance plan is to increase competition and thus drive down cost by forcing the private sector to compete. Why are conservatives not fighting back, stating it is the private sector that can best provide more competition? Why are they not quoting Adam Smith when he talked about "rational self interest" and competitive markets in his book Wealth of Nations? He envisioned many consumers interested in buying goods and services from many producers. This "free market" system best serves the private and public good.
Why are they not quoting Justice Louis Brandeis when he said in 1928:
"Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greater dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
Private markets and free enterprise are at the core of what conservatives stand for. So why are they not selling it to the public during this nationwide debate about health insurance? What our representatives in Washington should be doing is fighting to make the private sector of the health insurance industry free from the oligopolistic powers of many companies in the business.
Instead, their votes are bought with heavy campaign contributions by these oligopolies. If the government were serious about creating more competition in the insurance industry, they would be spending time enforcing anti-trust laws and other regulations created to keep private markets free from monopolies and oligopolies instead of arguing over a "public option" to health care. This is shown by the following quote from By Halimah Abdullah of the McClatchy Newspapers:
"As the Obama administration and Democrats wrangled
over the timing, shape and cost of health care overhaul efforts during the first half of the year, more than half the $1.1 million in campaign contributions the Democratic Party's Blue Dog Coalition received came from the pharmaceutical, health care and health insurance industries, according to watchdog organizations."
The Blue Dog Coalition is not alone. Sadly, it appears that before getting good health care reform, we need campaign contribution reform.
The private sector of the health care industry should be set free by government looking out for its' citizens and enforcing anti trust laws. A free, competitive market will drive down the cost of health care. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan; "Trust, but verify." Government has let the health care industry get out of hand. If government does its job of assuring free markets, free markets will drive down the cost of health care and the public will be "Free to Choose."
Fix Campaign Contributions And You Fix Health Care
Why are "we conservatives" not arguing that more free-market competition in the health insurance industry is what is needed? Lobbyist and special interest groups have bought off our representatives in Washington. There is no other logical answer.
A major argument of liberals for advocating a public sector health insurance plan is to increase competition and thus drive down cost by forcing the private sector to compete. Why are conservatives not fighting back, stating it is the private sector that can best provide more competition? Why are they not quoting Adam Smith when he talked about "rational self interest" and competitive markets in his book Wealth of Nations? He envisioned many consumers interested in buying goods and services from many producers. This "free market" system best serves the private and public good.
Why are they not quoting Justice Louis Brandeis when he said in 1928:
"Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greater dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."
Private markets and free enterprise are at the core of what conservatives stand for. So why are they not selling it to the public during this nationwide debate about health insurance? What our representatives in Washington should be doing is fighting to make the private sector of the health insurance industry free from the oligopolistic powers of many companies in the business.
Instead, their votes are bought with heavy campaign contributions by these oligopolies. If the government were serious about creating more competition in the insurance industry, they would be spending time enforcing anti-trust laws and other regulations created to keep private markets free from monopolies and oligopolies instead of arguing over a "public option" to health care. This is shown by the following quote from By Halimah Abdullah of the McClatchy Newspapers:
"As the Obama administration and Democrats wrangled over the timing, shape and cost of health care overhaul efforts during the first half of the year, more than half the $1.1 million in campaign contributions the Democratic Party's Blue Dog Coalition received came from the pharmaceutical, health care and health insurance industries, according to watchdog organizations."
The Blue Dog Coalition is not alone. Sadly, it appears that before getting good health care reform, we need campaign contribution reform.
The private sector of the health care industry should be set free by government looking out for its' citizens and enforcing anti trust laws. A free, competitive market will drive down the cost of health care. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan; "Trust, but verify." Government has let the health care industry get out of hand. If government does its job of assuring free markets, free markets will drive down the cost of health care and the public will be "Free to Choose."
One thread through all problems - Oligopolies
What does the American auto industry, the health care industry, wall street firms and the banking industry all have in common; other than they were all on the brink of failure?
These are industries where the production side of the industry is no longer a free market with many producers competing head-to head to earn the business of consumers, or customers, of the industry. Instead each of these industries are controlled by a relatively small number of very large corporations that have transformed these markets into oligopolies.
Adam Smith when he discussed "rational self interest" and competitive markets in his book Wealth of Nations, envisioned many consumers buying goods and services from many producers with everyone looking out for their self-interest. By keeping markets "free", producers pursue rational self-interest and this will best meet the needs of the consumers and the citizens of our country. Under this system of free markets, what is in the producers self interest is to provide the best product possible to the consumer, while striving to be a low cost producer for their niche.
This consolidation of markets began in the late 1960's early 1970's in the auto industry when it was transformed from a free market to an industry that was controlled by three giant corporations and one union. As this transformation was occurring the auto company's and auto union's self-interest became separated from what the consumer wanted and/or needed. Competition between the companies broke down and this gave an opening for foreign competition to enter our markets and the beginning of the end of the American auto industry as we knew it.
Other industries saw what was happening in the auto industry and saw that government was not objecting so naturally they followed the same path with little concern on any ones part that we were losing our free market system to a more centralized market system of oligopolies. As a result we now have major markets where the producing entities self-interest is not always in line with the self-interest of the consumer. What is in the self-interest of the entities in these industries is to keep the oligopoly alive. Thus the creation of special interests and lobbyists.
These oligopolies have bought the protection of our representatives in Washington and state capitals. I am always baffled by the fact that corporations and unions cannot vote in this country, however they are allowed to buy votes with their contributions.
We lost track of a key ingredient that Adam Smith identified as necessary in order for "rational self interest" to work. There must be many producers. In too many industries, the number of producers has shrunk and the ones remaining have gotten "too big to fail". This is true in the auto industry, the banking industry, wall street, health care and will soon be true in the computer software industry.
When discussing the health insurance industry proponents for this specific oligopoly site the fact that the bigger the insured pool, the lower insurance premiums can be. However, I submit that this "bigger pool savings" is more than offset by the fact that the rational self-interest of the companies is not totally aligned with the rational self interest of the insured. The insurance industries self-interest is to keep the oligopoly alive. The self-interest of the insured is to have as many insurance companies as possible clawing to get his business and thus ringing out all excessive cost, including unconscionable salaries for top executives, to earn the consumers business.
The liberals are right that regulation is required and conservatives are right that a free market is the best way to meet the needs and wants of our citizens. The common ground is that regulation is essential to make our markets more free. We have too many industries where companies have too much power, their self interest is not aligned with the citizens of this country and they are too big to fail.
It is time that our politicians breakaway from the shackles of oligopolies, special interests groups and lobbyists. Use antitrust legislation to bring back free markets.
Free our "Free Markets"!
What does the American auto industry, the health care industry, wall street firms and the banking industry all have in common; other than they were all on the brink of failure?
These are industries where the production side of the industry is no longer a free market with many producers competing head-to head to earn the business of consumers, or customers, of the industry. Instead each of these industries are controlled by a relatively small number of very large corporations that have transformed these markets into oligopolies.
Adam Smith when he discussed "rational self interest" and competitive markets in his book Wealth of Nations, envisioned many consumers buying goods and services from many producers with everyone looking out for their self-interest. By keeping markets "free", producers pursue rational self-interest and this will best meet the needs of the consumers and the citizens of our country. Under this system of free markets, what is in the producers self interest is to provide the best product possible to the consumer, while striving to be a low cost producer for their niche.
This consolidation of markets began in the late 1960's early 1970's in the auto industry when it was transformed from a free market to an industry that was controlled by three giant corporations and one union. As this transformation was occurring the auto company's and auto union's self-interest became separated from what the consumer wanted and/or needed. Competition between the companies broke down and this gave an opening for foreign competition to enter our markets and the beginning of the end of the American auto industry as we knew it.
Other industries saw what was happening in the auto industry and saw that government was not objecting so naturally they followed the same path with little concern on any ones part that we were losing our free market system to a more centralized market system of oligopolies. As a result we now have major markets where the producing entities self-interest is not always in line with the self-interest of the consumer. What is in the self-interest of the entities in these industries is to keep the oligopoly alive. Thus the creation of special interests and lobbyists.
These oligopolies have bought the protection of our representatives in Washington and state capitals. I am always baffled by the fact that corporations and unions cannot vote in this country, however they are allowed to buy votes with their contributions.
We lost track of a key ingredient that Adam Smith identified as necessary in order for "rational self interest" to work. There must be many producers. In too many industries, the number of producers has shrunk and the ones remaining have gotten "too big to fail". This is true in the auto industry, the banking industry, wall street, health care and will soon be true in the computer software industry.
When discussing the health insurance industry proponents for this specific oligopoly site the fact that the bigger the insured pool, the lower insurance premiums can be. However, I submit that this "bigger pool savings" is more than offset by the fact that the rational self-interest of the companies is not totally aligned with the rational self interest of the insured. The insurance industries self-interest is to keep the oligopoly alive. The self-interest of the insured is to have as many insurance companies as possible clawing to get his business and thus ringing out all excessive cost, including unconscionable salaries for top executives, to earn the consumers business.
The liberals are right that regulation is required and conservatives are right that a free market is the best way to meet the needs and wants of our citizens. The common ground is that regulation is essential to make our markets more free. We have too many industries where companies have too much power, their self interest is not aligned with the citizens of this country and they are too big to fail.
It is time that our politicians breakaway from the shackles of oligopolies, special interests groups and lobbyists. Use antitrust legislation to bring back free markets.
Buying Influence
Why are "we conservatives" not arguing that more free-market competition in the health insurance industry is what is needed? Lobbyist and special interest groups have bought off our representatives in Washington. There is no other logical answer. A major argument of liberals for advocating a public sector health insurance plan is to increase competition and thus drive down cost by forcing the private sector to compete. Why are conservatives not fighting back, stating it is the private sector that can best provide more competition? Why are they not quoting Adam Smith when he talked about "rational self interest" and competitive markets in his book Wealth of Nations? He envisioned many consumers interested in buying goods and services from many producers. This "free market" system best serves the private and public good. Why are they not quoting Justice Louis Brandeis when he said in 1928: "Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greater dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." Private markets and free enterprise are at the core of what conservatives stand for. So why are they not selling it to the public during this nationwide debate about health insurance? What our representatives in Washington should be doing is fighting to make the private sector of the health insurance industry free from the oligopolistic powers of many companies in the business. Instead, their votes are bought with heavy campaign contributions by these oligopolies. If the government were serious about creating more competition in the insurance industry, they would be spending time enforcing anti-trust laws and other regulations created to keep private markets free from monopolies and oligopolies instead of arguing over a "public option" to health care. This is shown by the following quote from By Halimah Abdullah of the McClatchy Newspapers: "As the Obama administration and Democrats wrangled over the timing, shape and cost of health care overhaul efforts during the first half of the year, more than half the $1.1 million in campaign contributions the Democratic Party's Blue Dog Coalition received came from the pharmaceutical, health care and health insurance industries, according to watchdog organizations." The Blue Dog Coalition is not alone. Sadly, it appears that before getting good health care reform, we need campaign contribution reform. The private sector of the health care industry should be set free by government looking out for its' citizens and enforcing anti trust laws. A free, competitive market will drive down the cost of health care. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan; "Trust, but verify." Government has let the health care industry get out of hand. If government does its job of assuring free markets, free markets will drive down the cost of health care and the public will be "Free to Choose."
| Jump to top |
