Re: [OT] USA Elections
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Nov 05, 2012
- 2840 views
If you think reduced choice in health care, increased cost, lowered supply are going to help all of that
I don't see how any of this is currently true.
Yes, but appearances can be deceiving. Laws that are nominally aimed at a particular purpose always have unintended consequences. Often those consequences work to opposite purposes of the intention of the law.
I would firstly agree that sometimes they do work against their self proclaimed principles. This is largely the Tea Party critique of the Republican party. And in those cases, they tend to do things that are in agreement with the stated principles of the Democratic party (and Progressives in general).
This is about compromise. A case can be made that since the Tea Party is unwilling to compromise, they are undermining their own goals. (E.g. the no-tax pledge leading to the fiscal cliff.)
And I think Hayek nailed it with the knowledge problem in describing why central planning is inferior to a market guided by prices.
I agree with this. Keep in mind that this is important to the central premise of Keynesian economics - that the market works best most of the time, but something a carefully limited helping hand is needed to prevent and limit damage.
