Thursday, July 14, 2005
Politician's Purgatory
Price Controls & Cheap Canadian Drugs
Price Controls & Cheap Canadian Drugs
Most people know prescription drugs can be purchased more cheaply in Canada than in the United States but either don’t want to know why or simply don’t care as long as they’re cheaper. Due to the recent veiled threat by the Canadian Government to outlaw selling to Americans due to a concern about a shortage it is time to review the fallacy of price controls one more time. When the government sets the price of a commodity below market price level two things happen. Because the price is artificially low people buy the commodity and either sell it where price controls don’t exist or consume it. This demand for the commodity puts a strain on the producers because they are producing at the same costs as their free market competitors but are operating at a lower ( or non ) profit margin. A producer able to make more money on a commodity will be able to update his machinery, increase his capital investment, spend more on marketing and in effect become a more reliable supplier. Meanwhile the producer shackled by price controls can only cut costs until he is running a bare bones operation and either losing money or barely breaking even. With this for an incentive his production and quality must suffer. Now if he is buying from a free market producer and selling under price controls that require him to lose money he will ultimately have to go out of business. This is what the Canadian Government is discovering the hard way.
Now this knowledge about economics is not new. There are documented failures of price controls dating back forty centuries. But just as there are con artists in all endeavors who try to scam instead of produce the political arena is no exception. People who lobby for what they perceive is in the interest of their constituents ( like those who champion political pressure groups like AARP and multitudes of governmental representatives ) should spend more time learning about how economics works and less time promising things they cannot deliver. But since they can’t and won’t they need to be exposed for their lack of training and/or interest in the truth. Pointing fingers and passing more laws has not and will not create prescription drugs but only aggravate the shortage. Look at the price of computers and how there is an abundance at lower and lower prices and imagine what would be the result if the government told computer producers they could not charge over $20.00 for their product. There would be a big rush to get the cheap computers, there would then be a shortage of computers and then there would be rationing and then computers would be only available to those with political connections. Sound familiar? This is what happens to all price control schemes and Canadian drugs are no exception.
Most people know prescription drugs can be purchased more cheaply in Canada than in the United States but either don’t want to know why or simply don’t care as long as they’re cheaper. Due to the recent veiled threat by the Canadian Government to outlaw selling to Americans due to a concern about a shortage it is time to review the fallacy of price controls one more time. When the government sets the price of a commodity below market price level two things happen. Because the price is artificially low people buy the commodity and either sell it where price controls don’t exist or consume it. This demand for the commodity puts a strain on the producers because they are producing at the same costs as their free market competitors but are operating at a lower ( or non ) profit margin. A producer able to make more money on a commodity will be able to update his machinery, increase his capital investment, spend more on marketing and in effect become a more reliable supplier. Meanwhile the producer shackled by price controls can only cut costs until he is running a bare bones operation and either losing money or barely breaking even. With this for an incentive his production and quality must suffer. Now if he is buying from a free market producer and selling under price controls that require him to lose money he will ultimately have to go out of business. This is what the Canadian Government is discovering the hard way.
Now this knowledge about economics is not new. There are documented failures of price controls dating back forty centuries. But just as there are con artists in all endeavors who try to scam instead of produce the political arena is no exception. People who lobby for what they perceive is in the interest of their constituents ( like those who champion political pressure groups like AARP and multitudes of governmental representatives ) should spend more time learning about how economics works and less time promising things they cannot deliver. But since they can’t and won’t they need to be exposed for their lack of training and/or interest in the truth. Pointing fingers and passing more laws has not and will not create prescription drugs but only aggravate the shortage. Look at the price of computers and how there is an abundance at lower and lower prices and imagine what would be the result if the government told computer producers they could not charge over $20.00 for their product. There would be a big rush to get the cheap computers, there would then be a shortage of computers and then there would be rationing and then computers would be only available to those with political connections. Sound familiar? This is what happens to all price control schemes and Canadian drugs are no exception.
Politician's Purgatory
It isn’t Democracy. It isn’t Liberation. It’s Religion
It isn’t Democracy. It isn’t Liberation. It’s Religion
We are fighting a war but it isn’t about creating a democracy in a country or liberating that country. The liberation has been accomplished. The dictator has been deposed, the regime has been dismantled and the road is clear for those who want to establish a free country. The reason that isn’t happening isn’t because elections are needed (elections have been held ). A free country depends on the right ideas and there is no dissemination of the right ideas from within or from without. The ideas we are sending are bromides that freedom will come when all the “insurgents” are defeated, the country is rebuilt ( at America’s expense with our soldiers acting as carpenters and painters ) and the Iragi citizens see what we have done for them. We are not dealing with the fundamental issue. The issue is ( in spite of the evasions and apologies ) religion.
Religion is a set of beliefs based on faith. Faith is unquestioning belief that does not allow for reason. Without reason there can be no analysis, no understanding, no acceptance and yes, no peace. The creation of a secular government where all religions are recognized can only survive if the role of reason is supreme. Using reason to reveal the conflicts of the past and prevent them in the future makes clear the need for knowledge derived from observation and understanding rather than revelation and dictates. To get to this point requires the rejection of faith as a means of knowledge. It also requires an understanding of what reason is , how it works and why it is the only way for men to come to sound conclusions about how they can and should interact with each other. There can be no guidance in this regard if each party claims to be a spokesman for a supreme being that calls for the elimination of the “unbeliever”.
This issue is being avoided now just as it has been avoided in all the religious wars that have ravaged the world for centuries. The Crusades had many of the same battle-cries we hear today. Just as an argument continues until the fundamental issue is resolved so too the war on terror will rage until we recognize we are not fighting effectively until we clearly say what we are fighting for and why. We now have our security threatened by scattered groups of religious zealots seeking world domination and the elimination of all who do not subscribe to their interpretation of their belief system. We live in a country that allows all belief systems to exist which means none of these are allowed to be dominant and our government is forbidden to establish a state religion. We know that this system works as it has survived and flourished when no other form has.
But our system is based on a recognition that no one has the right to force their ideas on others. It is fair, it is just and it is based on reason. Our government was created to protect this idea and even though it has eroded this responsibility by claiming public good trumps individual rights it is still fundamentally sound. If it were explicitly reviewed, reiterated and applied, the road to peace would be far more accessible. However, by trying to integrate unquestioning bromides with the sound principles of our founding we are undercutting our security and stooping to the arguments of the fanatics that shout they know the truth and unless they enforce it they are not doing “God’s Will”. Those in America who claim our religious heritage has led us to freedom overlook the role of reason that pointed the way for tolerance of beliefs and a ban on their enforcement by law. This wisdom is recognized and practiced in our country but it is hidden from debate by cowing to the customs and traditions of countries unwilling to recognize why it trumps zealotry.
Yes we are in this war for the long haul but we are extending the road by shrinking from facing the issue that has created and sustains the war. Our media shuns the issue as too controversial and unacceptable to too many viewers/readers/listeners. Our clergy echo the claims of the terrorists that ,”God is on our side”. The government naively thinks its weapons and non-confrontational “diplomacy” will win the day if only enough citizens and soldiers believe in the course they are struggling to define. It is no wonder the war’s end is not in sight. The enemy has not been defined. The enemy is the ideas held by the killers. Why they defined us as the enemy can only be traced to the beliefs they have accepted. If we do not reject their beliefs as central to the conflict we are simply repeating history.
So how do we escape this self imposed dilemma? We first of all have to define what it is that we stand for and why. We have to be stalwart in our defense of reason and reject out of hand any role of faith from either side. We have to point to the value of living on earth and rejecting totally any illusions of an afterlife. If we do not value this life there is no other to defend. If we wish to hold on to our misconceptions and beliefs that we cannot prove then we like the terrorists will only seek mutual destruction. If we do not want to subjugate death to life and treat life as our highest value then we have opened the door to sacrifice for ourselves and our loved ones. We do not have to continue to flounder in a quagmire of ill defined missions. We are perfectly capable of recognizing that what is wrong is a reliance on a method of obtaining knowledge that is divorced from reality and is not appropriate for mankind. With this as our banner we can determine whether or not a given action is in our interest. We can reexamine and correct what needs to be clarified and executed. We can communicate from a common base. This is not possible with the illusion that faith will triumph. After two thousand years of faith is it not time to give reason a chance? It works in your daily life. You don’t rely on faith to fix your flat tire or cook your breakfast. Why relegate it to the security of your life and your nation?
Dale Netherton
26070 Hawk Drive
Farmington, Iowa 52626
319-878-3715
We are fighting a war but it isn’t about creating a democracy in a country or liberating that country. The liberation has been accomplished. The dictator has been deposed, the regime has been dismantled and the road is clear for those who want to establish a free country. The reason that isn’t happening isn’t because elections are needed (elections have been held ). A free country depends on the right ideas and there is no dissemination of the right ideas from within or from without. The ideas we are sending are bromides that freedom will come when all the “insurgents” are defeated, the country is rebuilt ( at America’s expense with our soldiers acting as carpenters and painters ) and the Iragi citizens see what we have done for them. We are not dealing with the fundamental issue. The issue is ( in spite of the evasions and apologies ) religion.
Religion is a set of beliefs based on faith. Faith is unquestioning belief that does not allow for reason. Without reason there can be no analysis, no understanding, no acceptance and yes, no peace. The creation of a secular government where all religions are recognized can only survive if the role of reason is supreme. Using reason to reveal the conflicts of the past and prevent them in the future makes clear the need for knowledge derived from observation and understanding rather than revelation and dictates. To get to this point requires the rejection of faith as a means of knowledge. It also requires an understanding of what reason is , how it works and why it is the only way for men to come to sound conclusions about how they can and should interact with each other. There can be no guidance in this regard if each party claims to be a spokesman for a supreme being that calls for the elimination of the “unbeliever”.
This issue is being avoided now just as it has been avoided in all the religious wars that have ravaged the world for centuries. The Crusades had many of the same battle-cries we hear today. Just as an argument continues until the fundamental issue is resolved so too the war on terror will rage until we recognize we are not fighting effectively until we clearly say what we are fighting for and why. We now have our security threatened by scattered groups of religious zealots seeking world domination and the elimination of all who do not subscribe to their interpretation of their belief system. We live in a country that allows all belief systems to exist which means none of these are allowed to be dominant and our government is forbidden to establish a state religion. We know that this system works as it has survived and flourished when no other form has.
But our system is based on a recognition that no one has the right to force their ideas on others. It is fair, it is just and it is based on reason. Our government was created to protect this idea and even though it has eroded this responsibility by claiming public good trumps individual rights it is still fundamentally sound. If it were explicitly reviewed, reiterated and applied, the road to peace would be far more accessible. However, by trying to integrate unquestioning bromides with the sound principles of our founding we are undercutting our security and stooping to the arguments of the fanatics that shout they know the truth and unless they enforce it they are not doing “God’s Will”. Those in America who claim our religious heritage has led us to freedom overlook the role of reason that pointed the way for tolerance of beliefs and a ban on their enforcement by law. This wisdom is recognized and practiced in our country but it is hidden from debate by cowing to the customs and traditions of countries unwilling to recognize why it trumps zealotry.
Yes we are in this war for the long haul but we are extending the road by shrinking from facing the issue that has created and sustains the war. Our media shuns the issue as too controversial and unacceptable to too many viewers/readers/listeners. Our clergy echo the claims of the terrorists that ,”God is on our side”. The government naively thinks its weapons and non-confrontational “diplomacy” will win the day if only enough citizens and soldiers believe in the course they are struggling to define. It is no wonder the war’s end is not in sight. The enemy has not been defined. The enemy is the ideas held by the killers. Why they defined us as the enemy can only be traced to the beliefs they have accepted. If we do not reject their beliefs as central to the conflict we are simply repeating history.
So how do we escape this self imposed dilemma? We first of all have to define what it is that we stand for and why. We have to be stalwart in our defense of reason and reject out of hand any role of faith from either side. We have to point to the value of living on earth and rejecting totally any illusions of an afterlife. If we do not value this life there is no other to defend. If we wish to hold on to our misconceptions and beliefs that we cannot prove then we like the terrorists will only seek mutual destruction. If we do not want to subjugate death to life and treat life as our highest value then we have opened the door to sacrifice for ourselves and our loved ones. We do not have to continue to flounder in a quagmire of ill defined missions. We are perfectly capable of recognizing that what is wrong is a reliance on a method of obtaining knowledge that is divorced from reality and is not appropriate for mankind. With this as our banner we can determine whether or not a given action is in our interest. We can reexamine and correct what needs to be clarified and executed. We can communicate from a common base. This is not possible with the illusion that faith will triumph. After two thousand years of faith is it not time to give reason a chance? It works in your daily life. You don’t rely on faith to fix your flat tire or cook your breakfast. Why relegate it to the security of your life and your nation?
Dale Netherton
26070 Hawk Drive
Farmington, Iowa 52626
319-878-3715
