Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for October, 2009

A Novel Idea

Read what you sign!

Yes, I have advocated that people who enter contracts (e.g. mortgage agreements, credit card agreements) should read the documents before they sign them, but I refer here to another novel idea.

Maybe legislators should read the laws on which they vote. Yes, they should read every word of every law upon which they cast a vote.

How can they claim to represent you when they don’t read the laws to which you must abide? You should read the personal contracts to which you commit individually. They should read the contracts to which they commit you, without your individual consent.

This idea has caught on with a group known as Downsize DC that wants to put it into law: http://www.downsizedc.org/page/read_the_laws.

They should, however, carry this legislation one step further. If bills require the signature of the President before they become law, should he not have to read them first? Yes. How can we claim “checks and balances,” if the President does not also read what he signs into law.

Some might say, “If he did that, he would not have time for anything else.”

That’s the point.

Read Full Post »

Now that the discussion has turned to the Fed finding an “exit strategy,” we should revisit a cartoon that circulated earlier this year.

Self explanatory

Delayed results.

Like most ill conceived actions, retreat has its ugly side.
Thanks to Eric Lewis.

Read Full Post »

I wrote the title of this blog entry as an equation because it depicts the simplicity of the error in the logic committed by those who advocate government involvement in what we should call “sicknesscare.” Congress has proposed 1,500 pages of legislation to implement what amounts to simple folly.

Government “healthcare” programs take resources from health people and give them to sick people. It’s that simple.

The result: we get more sick people and fewer healthy people.

You can crawl through the weeds of the detail, but that won’t provide you with any more enlightenment. However the details work out, when you get the government involved things get worse.

If you like government involvement, you should encourage taking resources from sick people and giving them to healthy people. Sounds draconian, but it would encourage more health.

Better yet, get the government out of the process entirely. Let people take care of their own health. It’s a strange concept called liberty.

What about unexpected catastrophic illness?

To paraphrase the great Professor Deming, “Don’t treat a special cause as a common cause.” In other words, don’t tax the entire system all the time to help exceptional cases. Remember real insurance and charity. We don’t need to support a bad system to remember to take care of people who really need help.

Don’t reform government “healthcare;” stop it.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.