The Mystery of the Media Mind
I fired off a copy of my entry on the Ellen Goodman / Maine-Health-Care-Is-Good column to my local paper, the Indy Star, and they ran it as a Letter to the Editor.
It is interesting to see what gets cut out. I'll reprint the original below, and highlight in bold the things that were cut, and put in italics the things that were changed or added.
This responds to Ellen Goodman's July 8 column, "What he's done for the people."
If ice cream cones are offered to the public free of charge, you can expect that there will be a run on ice cream cones. The line will be long, and even people who don't particulalry want or need an ice cream cone will queue up to get one. After all- they're free!
If luxury automobiles are similarly given away, the line will be longer, since the unearned value to be obtained is greater.
In the usual analysis of health care, the cost is derided as a great negative. The cost is seen as high, and as preventing some from access to the care. But high cost does have a function. It ensures that need really is the driving force behind acquisition of care. Cost makes all interested parties choose carefully before committing to spending.
Health care, like any other human product or service, is still subject to the laws of supply and demand. Maine Gov. John Baldacci's plan ignores this reality.
What has Baldacci done for the people? He has done something for all of the people, wittingly or not.
I was hoping that Oregon would have passed statewide universal healthcare when the voters had the chance to adapt it. Alas, the voters shot it down 80-20. Maybe the people there know something.
What Baldacci has done in not letting the voters decide is to give the other 49 states a classroom experience. We will all get to see if this thing works or if it fails. Expect it to be a disaster.
Mark Maine's current population statistics. That will be a telling figure. The other telling figure will be the poverty statistics. Expect both to increase. Sure, the people paying the tax bill will have a good reason to exodus, but they will have trouble getting to the turnstyle as those looking for health care that is provided by someone other than themselves clog the entrance.
Maine may not be the last state to enact this hideous policy. If my home state of Indiana follows suit Maine's example, I will make good on the kind of threat George Clooney reneged on: I'll leave it for a more liberty-loving, hospitable state.
That's no idle threat. I gave myself a 7% raise when I left Ohio last August, just on the tax savings. Think I wouldn't do it again?
The edit that strikes me as most curious is the one that begins, 'Mark Maine's current population statistics..." What the edit has done is to leave my assertion hanging out there with no support.
Not surprisingly, both references to unearned benefits were chopped. Also not so surprising was the chopping of my reminder that Oregon voters opposed universal health care in their state in a landslide.
Lastly, I was not surprised to see my description of Maine's policy as 'hideous' removed.
I was glad that what was left of the letter was printed, and that the main case could still be gleaned from it. I find it a fascinating before-and-after comparison, to be sure.
Wednesday, July 09, 2003
Tuesday, July 08, 2003
Great Boost!
It was a real thrill for me to get the news that my pal Brad Klopfenstein, a Libertarian candidate for City-County Council here in Indy, earned the endorsement of the F.O.P. The Indy Star has already published a story on the web, which should appear in tomorrow's print edition.
Who knew that the F.O.P. would even consider endorsing a Libertarian?
I ran what I thought of as very good news past a local LP member, and he told me that he was not impressed. He expressed concern that the endorsement of the F.O.P. could send the signal to local party members a shift away from principle.
I think it's terrific to receive the F.O.P.'s nod. It may as easily signal that they are coming around to our principles, that we have made our case convincingly, and that we Libertarians are credible and worthy of support.
I'm not sure which principle he meant. Consistently losing races, perhaps?
See, I'm very interested in conveying credibility to those who haven't voted LP in the past. An endorsement like this can only help convey credibility across party lines in a way few other tools can. It can prompt the timid voter to finally pull that LP lever. After all, we belong to a political party- and not a debate society- for the purpose of electing candidates. What sense is there in scorning an endorsement? What sense is there in preaching only to the choir? Bollocks!
So, rah-rah Brad. I hope you win a seat on the Council because I know that you are the kind of prinicpled man that should be on the Council.
It was a real thrill for me to get the news that my pal Brad Klopfenstein, a Libertarian candidate for City-County Council here in Indy, earned the endorsement of the F.O.P. The Indy Star has already published a story on the web, which should appear in tomorrow's print edition.
Who knew that the F.O.P. would even consider endorsing a Libertarian?
I ran what I thought of as very good news past a local LP member, and he told me that he was not impressed. He expressed concern that the endorsement of the F.O.P. could send the signal to local party members a shift away from principle.
I think it's terrific to receive the F.O.P.'s nod. It may as easily signal that they are coming around to our principles, that we have made our case convincingly, and that we Libertarians are credible and worthy of support.
I'm not sure which principle he meant. Consistently losing races, perhaps?
See, I'm very interested in conveying credibility to those who haven't voted LP in the past. An endorsement like this can only help convey credibility across party lines in a way few other tools can. It can prompt the timid voter to finally pull that LP lever. After all, we belong to a political party- and not a debate society- for the purpose of electing candidates. What sense is there in scorning an endorsement? What sense is there in preaching only to the choir? Bollocks!
So, rah-rah Brad. I hope you win a seat on the Council because I know that you are the kind of prinicpled man that should be on the Council.
No Myopic Stalinist Dwarf is Going to Make a George Clooney out of Me!
Let's nip this thing in the bud before it spreads like a cancer. I felt the tiniest twinge of fear when I read Ellen Goodman's column this morning. Maine passed statewide universal health care, and she thinks it's grand.
My presentation is allegorical. You'll get it as an economic issue this way. Besides, I get to make a reference to luxury automobiles!
If ice cream cones are offered to the public free of charge, you can expect that there will be a run on ice cream cones. The line will be long, and even people who don't particulalry want or need an ice cream cone will queue up to get one. After all- they're free!
If luxury automobiles are similarly given away, the line will be longer, since the unearned value to be obtained is greater.
In the usual analysis of health care, the cost is derided as a great negative. The cost is seen as high, and as preventing some from access to the care. But high cost does have a function. It ensures that need really is the driving force behind acquisition of care. Cost makes all interested parties choose carefully before committing to spending.
Health care, like any other human product or service, is still subject to the laws of supply and demand. Maine Gov. Baldacci's plan ignores this reality.
What has Baldacci done for the people? He has done something for all of the people, wittingly or not.
I was hoping that Oregon would have passed statewide universal healthcare when the voters had the chance to adapt it. Alas, the voters shot it down 80-20. Maybe the people there know something.
What Baldacci has done in not letting the voters decide is to give the other 49 states a classroom experience. We will all get to see if this thing works or if it fails. Expect it to be a disaster.
Mark Maine's current population statistics. That will be a telling figure. The other telling figure will be the poverty statistics. Expect both to increase. Sure, the people paying the tax bill will have a good reason to exodus, but they will have trouble getting to the turnstyle as those looking for health care that is provided by someone other than themselves clog the entrance.
Maine may not be the last state to enact this hideous policy. If my home state of Indiana follows suit, I will make good on the kind of threat George Clooney reneged on: I'll leave it for a more liberty-loving, hospitable state.
That's no idle threat. I gave myself a 7% raise when I left Ohio last August, just on the tax savings. Think I wouldn't do it again?
Let's nip this thing in the bud before it spreads like a cancer. I felt the tiniest twinge of fear when I read Ellen Goodman's column this morning. Maine passed statewide universal health care, and she thinks it's grand.
My presentation is allegorical. You'll get it as an economic issue this way. Besides, I get to make a reference to luxury automobiles!
If ice cream cones are offered to the public free of charge, you can expect that there will be a run on ice cream cones. The line will be long, and even people who don't particulalry want or need an ice cream cone will queue up to get one. After all- they're free!
If luxury automobiles are similarly given away, the line will be longer, since the unearned value to be obtained is greater.
In the usual analysis of health care, the cost is derided as a great negative. The cost is seen as high, and as preventing some from access to the care. But high cost does have a function. It ensures that need really is the driving force behind acquisition of care. Cost makes all interested parties choose carefully before committing to spending.
Health care, like any other human product or service, is still subject to the laws of supply and demand. Maine Gov. Baldacci's plan ignores this reality.
What has Baldacci done for the people? He has done something for all of the people, wittingly or not.
I was hoping that Oregon would have passed statewide universal healthcare when the voters had the chance to adapt it. Alas, the voters shot it down 80-20. Maybe the people there know something.
What Baldacci has done in not letting the voters decide is to give the other 49 states a classroom experience. We will all get to see if this thing works or if it fails. Expect it to be a disaster.
Mark Maine's current population statistics. That will be a telling figure. The other telling figure will be the poverty statistics. Expect both to increase. Sure, the people paying the tax bill will have a good reason to exodus, but they will have trouble getting to the turnstyle as those looking for health care that is provided by someone other than themselves clog the entrance.
Maine may not be the last state to enact this hideous policy. If my home state of Indiana follows suit, I will make good on the kind of threat George Clooney reneged on: I'll leave it for a more liberty-loving, hospitable state.
That's no idle threat. I gave myself a 7% raise when I left Ohio last August, just on the tax savings. Think I wouldn't do it again?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)