<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Detailed Abstractions &#187; free market</title>
	<atom:link href="http://detailedabstractions.com/category/free-market/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://detailedabstractions.com</link>
	<description>Pathologically Pro-Freedom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 02:46:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Infinite Monkey Theorems 20100701</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/01/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100701/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=infinite-monkey-theorems-20100701</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/01/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100701/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 16:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation/Deregulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Democrats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elena Kagan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[morality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nomination Process]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Oil Spill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Polling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reason.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Atlantic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Heritage Foundation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Technology Liberation Front]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=1095</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[More bad news for Obama &#38; the Democrats for 2010 elections.  Via The Atlantic here: Chris Cillizza&#8217;s Morning Fix reports new data from Gallup showing that independents now favor a generic Republican candidate for Congress over a generic Democrat by 12 points&#8230;. &#38; as is continually the case with this congress, more bad news for freedom.  Via [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>More bad news</strong> for Obama &amp; the Democrats for 2010 elections.  Via The Atlantic <a title="The Good Summarian" href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/the-good-summarian/59017/" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Chris Cillizza&#8217;s <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/morning-fix/1-2-3-ohio-lt.html"><strong>Morning Fix</strong></a> reports <a href="http://www.gallup.com/poll/141086/Independent-Voters-Favor-GOP-2010-Election-Tracking.aspx">new data</a> from Gallup showing that independents now favor a generic Republican candidate for Congress over a generic Democrat by 12 points&#8230;.</p>
<p>&amp; as is continually the case with this congress, <strong>more bad news</strong> for freedom.  Via The Hill <a title="Disclose Act requirements might end 30-second campaign advertisements" href="http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/house-races/106609-disclose-act-requirements-might-end-30-second-campaign-ads" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">The 30-second campaign ad could become a thing of the past for third-party groups if the Democrats’ campaign finance legislation becomes law.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Media strategists argue the new disclosure requirements would eat into the majority of their ad time&#8230;.</p>
<p>&amp; while we&#8217;re talking about lack of freedom&#8230;. what might <strong>Kagan do </strong>about this &#8220;disclose&#8221; act?  Via Reason.com <a title="Will Elena Kagan Allow Books to be Banned?" href="http://reason.com/archives/2010/06/29/will-elena-kagan-allow-books?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+reason/Articles+(Reason+Online+-+All+Articles+(except+Hit+%26+Run+blog))" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">As solicitor general of the United States, Elena Kagan argued in front of the Supreme Court that the federal government had the constitutional authority to ban certain political pamphlets. She also strongly implied that some political books, if they were partisan enough, could also be censored&#8230;..</p>
<p><strong>Does is matter </strong>that she&#8217;s against free political speech?  Unlikely&#8230;. via Yahoo News <a title="Court pick Kagan sails through Senate hearing" href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100701/pl_nm/us_usa_court_kagan" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Kagan&#8217;s performance in the Judiciary Committee drew praise from Democrats and compliments even from some critics, putting her on a path to confirmation by the full Senate sometime in July.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8220;She will be confirmed. I believe she will be confirmed,&#8221; said Republican Orrin Hatch, a member of the Judiciary Committee, predicting there would be at least some Republican support&#8230;..</p>
<p><strong>&amp; least we forgot</strong>, there&#8217;s still an oil spill&#8230;. which is being screwed up by the same government that is promising to &#8220;fix&#8221; healthcare&#8230;.  Via The Heritage Foundation <a title="Help Has Been on the Way" href="http://blog.heritage.org/2010/06/30/help-has-been-on-the-way/" target="_blank">here</a>, all kinds of people are offering help, but we&#8217;re still considering it:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">In total, there have <a href="https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.state.gov%2Fdocuments%2Forganization%2F143488.pdf">been 27 countries and 5 international organizations </a>offering boom, dispersants, skimmers, vessels, bird rehabilitation equipment as well expertise. Along with the <a href="http://blog.heritage.org/2010/06/30/morning-bell-obamas-oil-spill-to-do-list/">other important action items for the administration to undertake</a>, accepting international assistance must be a more urgent priority. The Department of State has a chart that lists the equipment and expertise sitting on the sidelines with most of the status orders “under consideration.” Owners of the equipment have been rapid in their response to government queries but the equipment remains idle. It simply needs to be better&#8230;.</p>
<p>Not to mention the economic killing impact the asinine moratorium is having:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Meanwhile, the Gulf continues to suffer. It’s not just government incompetence when it comes to the environmental cleanup; the administration’s policy decisions are making the economic harm much worse – especially the offshore drilling moratorium. Although the ban was only meant to affect those rigs operating in water 500 feet or deeper, it has led to a de facto ban on shallow water drilling&#8230;.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Butler said that only one of his four drill rigs are operating; all four were drilling before the spill. Spartan has six contracts that would put his entire fleet back to work, but he can’t get going until the permits come through, he added. The week before last, Butler said he had to lay off 72 employees. Come Tuesday he’ll have to let another 140 go. “That’s 140 families, is how I look at it,” Butler said&#8230;.</p>
<p>Not only incompetence in the clean-up, idiocy in quickly implemented, but poorly thought out regulations (DA post <a title="Regulate Now! Afterall, we have an oil crisis!!!" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/05/12/regulate-now-afterall-we-have-an-oil-crisis/" target="_blank">here</a>), The Atlantic takes all this and poses an interesting moral question <a title="Why Drilling Moratoriums Are a &quot;Morally False Choice&quot;" href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/why-drilling-moratoriums-are-a-morally-false-choice/59030/" target="_blank">here</a>:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">In <a href="http://ec2-184-73-199-217.compute-1.amazonaws.com/wnet/need-to-know/?p=1870&amp;preview=true">this video</a> from <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/07/why-drilling-moratoriums-are-a-morally-false-choice/59030/www.theclimatedesk.org">Climate Desk</a> partner Need to Know, Atlantic correspondent and oil expert Lisa Margonelli talks to Jon Meacham about halting drilling in the Gulf. She explains her view that Americans don&#8217;t have a right to drive cars and use gasoline unless we&#8217;re willing to drill for it in our own backyard&#8230;.</p>
<p><strong>For good news &#8211; </strong>research conducted on parents and children in reference to video games demonstrates that most parents actually don&#8217;t need government help.  Via The Technology Liberation Front (<a title="Latest Video Game “Essential Facts” Report" href="http://techliberation.com/2010/06/17/latest-video-game-essential-facts-report/?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:+techliberation+(Technology+Liberation+Front)" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<ul>
<li>93% of the time parents are present at the time games are purchased or rented</li>
<li>64% of parents believe games are a positive part of their children’s lives</li>
<li>86% of the time children receive their parents’ permission before purchasing or renting a game</li>
<li>48% of parents play computer and video games with their children at least weekly</li>
<li>97% of parents report always or sometimes monitoring the games their children play</li>
<li>76% of parents believe that the parental controls available in all new video game consoles are useful</li>
</ul>
<p>It might be scary to those in government who are continuing to try to push more laws concerning how parents raise their children as it discounts the need for those laws, but for us normal folk &#8211; it gives us what we see everyday:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Once again, these findings illustrate that <a href="http://techliberation.com/2010/06/11/news-flash-parenting-is-happening/">parents are</a> <a href="http://techliberation.com/2007/06/25/new-polls-suggest-radical-theory-parents-are-parenting/">parenting</a>!</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2010/07/01/infinite-monkey-theorems-20100701/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Russian &amp; Free Market Reforms</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/10/russian-free-market-reforms/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=russian-free-market-reforms</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/10/russian-free-market-reforms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 20:20:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Reforms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privatization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Russia]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=606</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In what has to be good news in the world &#038; especially Russian citizens, Russia appears to be moving forward towards free market reforms with help from former President Putin... Many reformers have been pushing the new President and Mr. Putin to begin to make real free market reforms and it looks like they've won some ground 
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In what has to be good news in the world &amp; especially Russian citizens, Russia appears to be moving forward towards free market reforms with help from former President Putin.</p>
<p>For Russia, the last 30 years has been marked by instability.  Russia in the 80&#8242;s was in a descent from crumbling Communism which limited real individual freedoms.  They moved from that, to a poorly implemented and corrupt form of cronyism, which also limited real individual freedoms.</p>
<p>Then to stabilize and reassert themselves to the international community, former President Putin worked towards a stronger central government.  In doing so, he too worked towards the removal of individual freedoms.  For example, having the government buy the the main press outlets, using the judicial system to attack  corporate heads who were against Mr. Putin&#8217;s reforms, changing election laws to reduce citizen say, and many other things.  All of which seemed a sure march back to Communism and the stage for a new global dynamic with Russia trying to be the main international opposition to the US.</p>
<p>However, in recent months Stratfor and other publications have been noticing changes inside the Russian government.  Many reformers have been pushing the new President and Mr. Putin to begin to make real free market reforms through privatization and it looks like they&#8217;ve won some ground (Stratfor Video below):</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><object classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000" width="425" height="350" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,40,0"><param name="src" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_NX5YyDFJKo" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_NX5YyDFJKo"></embed></object></p>
<p>Since I have a strong belief in the morality and pragmatism of individual freedom, this is a good sign.  Let&#8217;s hope it continues.</p>
<p>Odd thing is &#8211; those without freedoms or with lesser freedoms around the world have been pushing for market reforms, including Germany, France, China, Russia&#8230; while the US is pushing centralized control over banking and health care (to name two things).</p>
<p>Proving once again, that the price of freedom really is eternal vigilance.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/10/russian-free-market-reforms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Free Market in a Global Recession</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/02/the-free-market-in-a-global-recession/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=the-free-market-in-a-global-recession</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/02/the-free-market-in-a-global-recession/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:21:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bank of America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national bureau of economic research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nber]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stimulus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TARP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Treasury Department]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=421</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bank of America announced today it's plans to repay the $45 billion dollars in tarp money to get out from under the restrictions of the government (AFP):

...The bank based in North Carolina said it would repurchase the preferred shares issued to the US Treasury as part of TARP, but would not immediately buy back the warrants, or options to buy additional shares.

"This is good news that the bank can get out of the TARP and can stop having to answer to public and government criticism," said Jon Ogg at 24/7 Wall Street....
The policies BoA is trying to escape from includes restrictions on the top 25 individuals in the company including the CEO.  I and many others wrote about what a disastrous policy from the new administration this truly was (here):
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bank of America announced today it&#8217;s plans to repay the $45 billion dollars in tarp money to get out from under the restrictions of the government (<a title="Bank of America to repay $45 billion to US" href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gXE-NFI0_pMYQcqQe8-JSqJ2Ouxw" target="_blank">AFP</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;The bank based in North Carolina said it would repurchase the preferred shares issued to the US Treasury as part of TARP, but would not immediately buy back the warrants, or options to buy additional shares.</p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 1em; padding-left: 30px; margin: 0px;">&#8220;This is good news that the bank can get out of the TARP and can stop having to answer to public and government criticism,&#8221; said Jon Ogg at 24/7 Wall Street&#8230;.</p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 1em; margin: 0px;">The policies BoA is trying to escape from includes restrictions on the top 25 individuals in the company including the CEO.  I and many others wrote about what a disastrous policy from the new administration this truly was (<a title="This is a free society?" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/22/this-is-a-free-society/" target="_blank">here</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 30px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;">…<span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Even without bothering with the fact that the government is not in any position to understand what kind of compensation any single employee should have, this is still a radical and arbitrary move that if continued can work to destabilize the economy.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 30px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">…this decision is an anathema to a free society breaking not only the contract rights of ordinary citizens, but also violating all individuals by pushing a blatant <em>ex  post facto</em> punishment…</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Just two days earlier, I also wrote about BoA&#8217;s issues with getting a new CEO hired under all the government restrictions (<a title="A Paymaster in the Free Market" href="http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/11/30/a-paymaster-in-the-free-market/" target="_blank">here</a>).  Indeed, at least four potential candidates have simply stated they don&#8217;t want the job.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Now, if these policies were actually designed to do this, incentivize those companies with TARP money to pay it back as quickly as possible, bravo!</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Taking the language from the administration I doubt it, but it&#8217;s always good news when a major business under intense governmental scrutiny shows the quickest to its financial health is to remove the additional scrutiny.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">This also  parallels with a recent NBER Paper on the global economic recession (abstract <a title="Why are we in a recession? The Financial Crisis is the Symptom not the Disease!" href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w15404" target="_blank">here</a>, full paper purchase price $5).  In the full paper they try to prove the thesis that the main problem with the global economy is that investment money from developed countries should be flowing into developing countries, but instead developing countries such as India and China have investment income flowing into developed countries like the US &amp; Britain. </span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">&amp; This seems pretty intuitive.  In general, investment money will flow to inefficient markets, industries, and companies in an immature market.  The reason is easy &#8211; it&#8217;s more and faster bang for the buck.  However, in a mature economy like the US and as we move forward in time, there are less and less efficiencies to be gained through anything other than new technologies.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">In an immature market it&#8217;s the opposite case.  Industries and companies are new.  Small amounts of investment money can return great efficiency gains and therefore monetary gains.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Some people try to blame us citizens, consumerism, and capitalism in general for this failure, but that&#8217;s actually the opposite of the truth as well.  The reason Chinese citizens save so much more of their disposable income than do US citizens isn&#8217;t because they are more frugal, but have less real options to invest domestically even though major efficiency gains are theoretically possible.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">As the abstract states:</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em; padding-left: 30px;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">&#8230;The inability of emerging economies to absorb savings through domestic investment and consumption due to inadequate national financial markets and difficulties in enforcing financial contracts; the currency controls motivated by immediate national objectives; and the inability of the US economy to adjust to the perverse incentives caused by huge money inflows leading to a breakdown of checks and balances at various financial institutions. The financial crisis in the US was but the first acute symptom that had to be treated. A sustainable recovery will only occur when the natural flow of capital from developed to developing nations is restored&#8230;.</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">This doesn&#8217;t mean the US doesn&#8217;t have fault &#8211; so long as we continue to allow the government to write blank checks of any amount without respect to the deficit and ignoring huge unfunded liabilities such as MediCare &#8211; we seem to be on a sure path to a back slide.  I&#8217;m not really into prediction making as it&#8217;s obviously fraught with so many problems, but I&#8217;ll never understand how the solution to cheap money and an over investment of housing, is to keep money cheap and incentivize home buying (<a title="Stupid Is, As Stupid Does" href="That’s correct – our politicians are currently pushing FHA to make the same idiotic guarantees that Fannie &amp; Freddie did, that helped cause the current mess we’re in.  " target="_blank">here</a>).</span></p>
<p style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 15px; margin-left: 0px; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="line-height: 20px; padding: 0px; margin: 0px;">Either way, it&#8217;s good news for BoA, with investors showing their interest with heavy after hours trading (<a title="Bank of America jumps in heavy after-hours volume" href="http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/BAC?siteid=rss&amp;utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed:%20marketwatch/realtimeheadlines%20(MarketWatch.com%20-%20Real-time%20Headlines)&amp;utm_content=Google%20Reader" target="_blank">here</a>).</span></p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/12/02/the-free-market-in-a-global-recession/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An Alternative: The Market Option</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/26/an-alternative-the-market-option/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=an-alternative-the-market-option</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/26/an-alternative-the-market-option/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 20:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creative Destruction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decentralization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Incentives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Late last week, Michael F. Cannon @ Cato released a study entitled, Yes, Mr. President A Free Market Can Fix Health Care in response to a challenge made by President Obama in March 2009:

“If there is a way of getting this done where we’re driving down costs and people are getting health insurance at an affordable rate, and have choice of doctor, have flexibility in terms of their plans, and we could do that entirely through the market, I’d be happy to do it that way.”]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Late last week, Michael F. Cannon @ Cato released a study entitled, <a title="Yes, Mr. President A Free Market Can Fix Health Care" href="http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa650.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Yes, Mr. President A Free Market Can Fix Health Care</em></a> in response to a challenge made by President Obama in March 2009:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">“If there is a way of getting this done where we’re driving down costs and people are getting health insurance at an affordable rate, and have choice of doctor, have flexibility in terms of their plans, and we could do that entirely through the market, I’d be happy to do it that way.”</p>
<p>This is very much a presumption based question, like &#8220;When did you stop beating your wife?&#8221;  It holds within an assumption the only plausible answer is one which uses the power of the government to control the market, and by extension individual citizens, with complete skepticism about any power of the free market.</p>
<p>While this seems to be the default assumption of many of my fellow citizens these days, I don&#8217;t know that I&#8217;ll ever understand how an objective look at market success versus an objective look at governmental success would lead one to believe the government is capable of much more than simple, repetitive tasks.</p>
<p>Having said that and even knowing the Democratic leadership and the White House is likely to ignore the answer, Mr. Cannon presents a pretty convincing case about a market solution (<a title="      * Blog Home  Next: “Why Don’t We Fix the Two Public Options We Have Now instead of Creating a Third One?”  Previous: Hubris in Afghanistan" href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/10/22/yes-mr-president-a-free-market-can-fix-health-care/" target="_blank">@Cato</a>).  He explains:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">how Congress can remove the impediments that currently prevent markets from doing so:</p>
<blockquote>
<ol></ol>
</blockquote>
<li style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Give Medicare enrollees a voucher</strong> (adjusted for their means and health risk) and let them purchase any health plan on the market,</li>
<li style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Reform the tax treatment of health care with </strong><strong>“large” health savings accounts</strong>, which would give workers a $9.7 trillion tax cut (without increasing the deficit) and free them to purchase secure coverage that meets their needs,</li>
<li style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Free consumers and employers to purchase health insurance across state lines </strong>(i.e., licensed by other states), which could cover up to one third of the uninsured,</li>
<li style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Make state-issued clinician licenses portable</strong>, which would increase access to care and competition among health plans, and</li>
<li style="padding-left: 60px;"><strong>Block-grant Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program</strong>, just as Congress did with welfare.</li>
<p>Whole thing <a href="http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa650.pdf">here</a>.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/26/an-alternative-the-market-option/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Public Option</title>
		<link>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/26/the-public-option/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=the-public-option</link>
		<comments>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/26/the-public-option/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael S. Langston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Critical Thinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NGOs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cognitive Dissonance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Competition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cost/Benefit Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Market Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Freedom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government Services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care Reform]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[idiocy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logical Inconsistency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama Administration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Political Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wasteful Spending]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://detailedabstractions.com/?p=296</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you&#8217;re anything like me, you too are getting nauseous about the &#8220;public option&#8221; in the health care debate.  One day it exists, the next day it will never exist.  The day after, it&#8217;s required&#8230; Well, apparently legislators might have a compromise to pass a bill including an &#8220;opt-out public option&#8221; (@theHill.com): Democratic senators continued [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you&#8217;re anything like me, you too are getting nauseous about the &#8220;public option&#8221; in the health care debate.  One day it exists, the next day it will never exist.  The day after, it&#8217;s required&#8230;</p>
<p>Well, apparently legislators might have a compromise to pass a bill including an &#8220;opt-out public option&#8221; (<a title="Democratic leadership 'leaning strongly' toward opt-out for public healthcare plan" href="http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/64639-dem-leaders-leaning-strongly-toward-opt-out-for-public-healthcare-plan" target="_blank">@theHill.com</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Democratic senators continued to remain bullish on the chances of creating a government-run public option as part of health reform&#8230;.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;Schumer echoed the calls of several senators who this week said that Democratic negotiators has garned the 60 votes necessary to invoke closure on the measure. Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) last week put it in even stronger terms, saying that Reid had 60 votes for a “robust” public option.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;According to Schumer, Reid &#8220;is leaning strongly&#8221; toward including a provision that would allow states to opt out of public health insurance if they want to keep private insurers.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Schumer added that the liberal senators are &#8220;able to live with&#8221; an opt-out public option under which states could decline to participate in a public program&#8230;.</p>
<p>So there we are;  in a compromise between moderate and liberal Democrats only, a public option seems likely.  Not only has the White House and Democratic leadership dropped any pretense of working across the isle, but people at large seem unwilling to question the claims of their leaders.</p>
<p>One suc spurious claim, is that this option will result in increasing competition:</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">&#8230;&#8221;We need some competition for the insurance companies,&#8221; Schumer said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” A government-run insurance plan would &#8220;have to play by the same rules as the insurance companies and it would negotiate rates with the providers,&#8221; Schumer said. Having a public option would bring competition to states that only have one or two insurance providers, Schumer said&#8230;.</p>
<p>Proponents everywhere continue to take this stance, even though a public option is logically inconsistent with their stated goal of increase competition.</p>
<p>If Mr. Schumer and others truly wanted to add some competition for insurance companies, adding a new company would not be necessary.  In deed, removing the laws the disallow selling of insurance over state lines doesn&#8217;t cost the tax payers one single dime, yet increases competition dramatically, both in the total number of competitors and the speed at which they can begin competing.    Additionally, given the benefits a public option will have over its private competitors, this isn&#8217;t really competition.</p>
<p>As Michael Tanner wrote over @ Cato, this support for a public option isn&#8217;t likely what it seems (<a title="Cognitive Dissonance on Health Care Reform" href="http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10647" target="_blank">@Cato</a>):</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">Cognitive dissonance is defined as holding two completely contradictory ideas at the same time.</p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;">That seems to be the case with the American public, with a new poll showing rising support for a so-called public option in health care, even as the public continues to oppose greater government control over the health care system&#8230;.</p>
<p>All in all though, the Democrats hands seem to be very strong hand right now with recent <a title="Public option gains support" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/19/AR2009101902451.html?hpid=topnews" target="_blank">polls showing 57%</a> of the country expressing approval of a public option.   With uninformed voters, an uninformed and uninformative press, and politicians more worried about winning than engaging in honest debates, this compromise might soon become law.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s freedom for you &#8211;  as unfortunate as it seems, whether most people truly understand what the public option entails is irrelevant.  So long as they are willing to approve things they know little about and skip any hard work necessary to critically analyze the problem and various solutions, this new government boondoggle will just continue going forward.</p>
     ]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://detailedabstractions.com/2009/10/26/the-public-option/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
