Civil Rights
1. There is quite a bit of good news for civil rights. First, National Security Letters--which the federal government uses to get personal information on thousands of Americans from companies like Google--have been ruled unconstitutional. What made NSLs particularly disturbing was that the recipient companies were forbidden from ever acknowledging that they had given the government any information. Thankfully, these gag orders have also been ruled unconstitutional.
2. Second, the Supreme Court limited the use of sniffer dogs and expanded the Fourth Amendment's protection of the home by declaring that porches count as part of the home.
3. There's good news for civil rights in Canada as well. The Supreme Court there recently ruled that police need special wiretapping orders, not just ordinary search warrants, to intercept text messages.
Deficit & Spending
4. Via PostLibertarian, the federal deficit for the first six months of fiscal 2013 is 23% lower than the deficit for the same period in fiscal 2012. Government spending in March 2013 was more than 20% lower than in March 2012, a $76 billion fall from $369 to $293 billion. Moreover, an analysis of four major budget plans (President Obama's, Senate Democrats', House Republicans' and Senator Rand Paul's) shows that all four cut spending over the next ten years relative to the current-law baseline. The coming debate won't be whether or not to cut spending, it will be how much.
Energy & Climate
5. In November 2012, U.S. oil production surpassed that of Saudi Arabia! U.S. oil production also remained higher than Saudi Arabia's in December 2012. While month-to-month production fluctuates, and there may again be months where the Saudis produce more oil than we do, for at least two months in 2012, the United States was the largest oil producer in the world. U.S. oil production has continued to grow since then, and is now more than 7.2 million barrels per day, a level not seen since July 1992. Also in December, another country (China) imported more oil than the U.S. for the first time in four decades (ht).
6. Coral reefs are more resilient than we thought. Reefs damaged in super-hot 1998 were presumed to have little chance of recovery, yet they're recovering nonetheless.
Health
7. A new Bluetooth-enabled implant (ht) can monitor blood levels of up to five chemicals and transmit that data to a smartphone or tablet (and from there to the internet) in realtime. It can currently detect glucose (useful for diabetics), troponin (which is released during a heart attack) and a few other substances, but the device has been designed to accommodate sensors for substances not yet covered.
8. Functioning kidneys can now be grown in a lab, at least for rats. Doing the same with human kidneys will take some time, and even then the lab-grown versions are only 5% as efficient as natural, healthy kidneys. But if your natural kidneys aren't healthy, 5% could be enough of an improvement to be worth the transplant. No doubt researchers will also be working on improving that efficiency as well.
Poverty
9. Two recent studies, one from Oxford University and the other from the UN, highlight the improving conditions of the world's poor (ht via @LDoren). Many of the world's poorest nations are on track to eliminate acute poverty and growth is lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty. From the UN report: "Never in history have the living conditions and prospects of so many people changed so dramatically and so fast."
Other Optimists
10. Ezra Klein (ht MR) has his own list of reasons for optimism. Among others, he lists the slowing rise of health care costs, a turnaround in housing, corporate profits, natural gas and technological advances.
11. Stephan Kinsella (ht Bob Murphy) says, "The Golden Age of America is Now." Kinsella writes from a libertarian viewpoint, and therefore includes items like imminent marijuana legalization that some might not agree are actually good things. But many of his points cut across ideologies--there is no draft, air travel is safer and cheaper than ever and technology is amazing, from cell phones to the internet to 3D printing to private spaceflight. He also cites increased diversity and tolerance, saying, "some people are vegetarians, vegans; no big deal... Some people have nose rings, multiple earrings. Tattoos. Nobody cares... Mixed-race couples? Nobody bats an eye."
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Reasons for Optimism X
1. Americans today are 20% less likely to die from cancer than we were in 1991. The death rate from cancer has fallen from 215.1 to 173.1 per 100,000. The decrease has been seen in men, women and children. Although death rates for some cancers are up, death rates for the four most common types of cancer (lung, colon, breast and prostate) have all fallen by more than 30%.
2. A second person has been cured of HIV, this time a newborn treated with triple the typical dose of antiretroviral drugs. The only person to have previously been cured of HIV was Timothy Brown, cured after a bone marrow transplant from a donor who was naturally immune. This second case holds far more promise as it is cheaper and may be easier to replicate.
3. The FDA has finally approved an early version of Geordi's visor, although the manufacturer's have opted for the name "artificial retina" instead. The device wirelessly sends images from a camera to an eye implant. The downside is that the implant requires the user to have some functioning retinal cells, so this is not a full cure for blindness. The upside is that the bulk of the device can be removed just like normal glasses, making upgrades easy.
4. Don Boudreaux continues his Cleaned by Capitalism series with an entry on "health-care products supplied quite successfully by free markets on a fee-for-service basis."
5. Once again via Mark Perry, U.S. oil production continues to grow. Texas has doubled oil production in the last three years, and is now producing more domestic oil than the entire country imports from the Persian Gulf. Christof Rühl, chief economist for BP, wrote recently, "The United States is likely to surpass Saudi Arabia in daily output very soon, and non-OPEC production will dominate global supply growth over the coming decade."
Furthermore, as of October 2012, the United States is producing more oil per day than every country in Central and South America combined. As recently as 2009, those countries were consistently producing 25-30% more oil than the US.
But the shale revolution isn't just here in the United States. Global oil production for the first three quarters of 2012 was 1% higher than all of 2011. Once the numbers are in for the fourth quarter, 2012 is expected to set an all-time record. For those worried that increased oil production means we'll just run out sooner, consider that ExxonMobil discovered more new recoverable oil last year than they took out of the ground--for the 19th year in a row.
6. Mark Perry and Don Boudreaux together penned a Wall Street Journal opinion piece arguing against middle class stagnation. (AEI also has a copy, in case the WSJ version is eventually paywalled.) They address the CPI's overstatement of inflation, the expansion in non-wage compensation, the large-scale entry of women into the labor force, rising life expectancy, the falling cost of "basics" like housing and food at home, and falling inequality in services like air travel and goods like consumer electronics. The piece is a wide-ranging but somewhat shallow introduction to the many lines of evidence that life is actually improving for most Americans.
Boudreaux has follow-ups to the piece here, here, here and here, including responses to some critics. Perry has follow-ups here and here. There's also more on the topic from James Pethokoukis and David Henderson.
7. Via MR, a village in India has dramatically improved agriculture yields using a method called System of Root Intensification (SRI) that focuses on soil conditions and plant density. Poor farmers in Darveshpura have set new world records for rice and potatoes, and SRI seems to improve yields for other crops as well. Some doubt the claims are legitimate, but the ease of adopting the method would allow small farmers the world over to increase their yields if the claims prove true.
8. Oliver August of The Economist recently completed a wide-ranging journey across 23 African countries. In the interview, he speaks of how easy it was to complete the journey, and says, "The main experience of travelling across Africa is one of hopefulness, one of industry, one of striving amongst the many still-quite-poor people, and one of a sense of a future that is coming closer quite quickly."
2. A second person has been cured of HIV, this time a newborn treated with triple the typical dose of antiretroviral drugs. The only person to have previously been cured of HIV was Timothy Brown, cured after a bone marrow transplant from a donor who was naturally immune. This second case holds far more promise as it is cheaper and may be easier to replicate.
3. The FDA has finally approved an early version of Geordi's visor, although the manufacturer's have opted for the name "artificial retina" instead. The device wirelessly sends images from a camera to an eye implant. The downside is that the implant requires the user to have some functioning retinal cells, so this is not a full cure for blindness. The upside is that the bulk of the device can be removed just like normal glasses, making upgrades easy.
4. Don Boudreaux continues his Cleaned by Capitalism series with an entry on "health-care products supplied quite successfully by free markets on a fee-for-service basis."
5. Once again via Mark Perry, U.S. oil production continues to grow. Texas has doubled oil production in the last three years, and is now producing more domestic oil than the entire country imports from the Persian Gulf. Christof Rühl, chief economist for BP, wrote recently, "The United States is likely to surpass Saudi Arabia in daily output very soon, and non-OPEC production will dominate global supply growth over the coming decade."
Furthermore, as of October 2012, the United States is producing more oil per day than every country in Central and South America combined. As recently as 2009, those countries were consistently producing 25-30% more oil than the US.
But the shale revolution isn't just here in the United States. Global oil production for the first three quarters of 2012 was 1% higher than all of 2011. Once the numbers are in for the fourth quarter, 2012 is expected to set an all-time record. For those worried that increased oil production means we'll just run out sooner, consider that ExxonMobil discovered more new recoverable oil last year than they took out of the ground--for the 19th year in a row.
6. Mark Perry and Don Boudreaux together penned a Wall Street Journal opinion piece arguing against middle class stagnation. (AEI also has a copy, in case the WSJ version is eventually paywalled.) They address the CPI's overstatement of inflation, the expansion in non-wage compensation, the large-scale entry of women into the labor force, rising life expectancy, the falling cost of "basics" like housing and food at home, and falling inequality in services like air travel and goods like consumer electronics. The piece is a wide-ranging but somewhat shallow introduction to the many lines of evidence that life is actually improving for most Americans.
Boudreaux has follow-ups to the piece here, here, here and here, including responses to some critics. Perry has follow-ups here and here. There's also more on the topic from James Pethokoukis and David Henderson.
7. Via MR, a village in India has dramatically improved agriculture yields using a method called System of Root Intensification (SRI) that focuses on soil conditions and plant density. Poor farmers in Darveshpura have set new world records for rice and potatoes, and SRI seems to improve yields for other crops as well. Some doubt the claims are legitimate, but the ease of adopting the method would allow small farmers the world over to increase their yields if the claims prove true.
8. Oliver August of The Economist recently completed a wide-ranging journey across 23 African countries. In the interview, he speaks of how easy it was to complete the journey, and says, "The main experience of travelling across Africa is one of hopefulness, one of industry, one of striving amongst the many still-quite-poor people, and one of a sense of a future that is coming closer quite quickly."
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Recent Reasons for Optimism VII
1. Doctors in Toronto are using ultrasound to perform brain surgery without the surgery. During the five-hour procedure, Tony Lightfoot regained his ability to use his hands without tremors as high-intensity ultrasound destroyed the tissue causing the problem. The technique can also be used to eliminate other problem tissues, including certain kinds of cancer.
2. An organization called Diagnostics for All, backed by the Gates Foundation, is producing paper-based blood tests that can diagnose liver damage within minutes at a cost of less than a penny per test. Tests for other diseases, including malaria, dengue, hepatitis and diabetes, are being developed. While they're currently working on getting these diagnostic tests to poor countries, the benefit of cheap, easy diagnostic tests for the developed world is obvious. The main hurdle now seems to be getting regulatory approval, which is easier in poor countries than in the West.
3. New estimates from the IPCC of the climate's sensitivity to CO2 suggest warming over the rest of this century will be far less than previously estimated (more here). Moreover, a new study finds, at least with wheat yields, that the benefit from higher CO2 concentrations outweighs the cost of higher temperature. What little warming actually happens may end up being a good thing after all.
4. And even if it isn't, we'll be able to adapt. Thanks to cheap air conditioning, deaths from extreme temperatures declined by 80% over the 20th century in the US. Economic growth will bring similar gains to developing countries in the 21st century.
5. Mark Perry has more examples of the increase in prosperity since the 50s, including toasters, TVs, music players, washing machines and dryers. All of these have increased in quality (quite dramatically for TVs and music players), and yet are far cheaper. Don Boudreaux is also continuing his Cataloging Our Progress series with two entries on men's wear and one based on the Sears.com homepage.
6. Also from Mark Perry, the US is now producing more oil than at any other point since 1993, and Texas oil production is higher than it's been since 1987. Also from that second link, regarding natural gas, "The United States has gone from being the highest cost major gas producer four to five years ago to the current lowest cost producer."
7. The fiscal cliff has been averted. While the deal we ended up with isn't my first best choice by any means, I think it's an improvement over the cliff. For most of us, taxes are going up a little instead of a lot, as the Bush cuts were made permanent for most people while the payroll tax is going back up.
2. An organization called Diagnostics for All, backed by the Gates Foundation, is producing paper-based blood tests that can diagnose liver damage within minutes at a cost of less than a penny per test. Tests for other diseases, including malaria, dengue, hepatitis and diabetes, are being developed. While they're currently working on getting these diagnostic tests to poor countries, the benefit of cheap, easy diagnostic tests for the developed world is obvious. The main hurdle now seems to be getting regulatory approval, which is easier in poor countries than in the West.
3. New estimates from the IPCC of the climate's sensitivity to CO2 suggest warming over the rest of this century will be far less than previously estimated (more here). Moreover, a new study finds, at least with wheat yields, that the benefit from higher CO2 concentrations outweighs the cost of higher temperature. What little warming actually happens may end up being a good thing after all.
4. And even if it isn't, we'll be able to adapt. Thanks to cheap air conditioning, deaths from extreme temperatures declined by 80% over the 20th century in the US. Economic growth will bring similar gains to developing countries in the 21st century.
5. Mark Perry has more examples of the increase in prosperity since the 50s, including toasters, TVs, music players, washing machines and dryers. All of these have increased in quality (quite dramatically for TVs and music players), and yet are far cheaper. Don Boudreaux is also continuing his Cataloging Our Progress series with two entries on men's wear and one based on the Sears.com homepage.
6. Also from Mark Perry, the US is now producing more oil than at any other point since 1993, and Texas oil production is higher than it's been since 1987. Also from that second link, regarding natural gas, "The United States has gone from being the highest cost major gas producer four to five years ago to the current lowest cost producer."
7. The fiscal cliff has been averted. While the deal we ended up with isn't my first best choice by any means, I think it's an improvement over the cliff. For most of us, taxes are going up a little instead of a lot, as the Bush cuts were made permanent for most people while the payroll tax is going back up.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Recent Reasons for Optimism VI
While it's been awhile, I think it's time for another installment of Recent (more or less) Reasons for Optimism.
The Best of Humanity
1. Buzzfeed profiles some of the heroes of Sandy Hook. A single man embodied the worst that humanity can be and caused enormous suffering. But these six women stood up to the challenge and saved dozens of lives, some at the cost of their own.
2. Buzzfeed also has a list of "26 Moments that Restored Our Faith in Humanity." My favorites include the responses to Hurricane Sandy at #4 and #5, the man with the arthritic dog at #23, and the "parents of the year" at #24.
Health
3. This infographic, covering the leading causes of death since 1900, has some great reasons for optimism. The number one cause of death in 2010 was heart disease, but the deaths caused by heart disease have fallen steadily since their peak in the 60s, from about 370 to 193 per 100,000. Deaths from the second-worst killer, cancer, have also been falling since they peaked in the early 90s.
4. Scientists in the UK have successfully spurred nerve regeneration in paralyzed dogs by transplanting cells from the dogs' own noses to the injured areas. It remains to be seen if the technique will work in humans, but over several months, the dogs went from complete paralysis in the rear legs to being able to walk on a treadmill without assistance.
5. Jan Scheuermann, who is paralyzed from the neck down, can now operate a robotic arm using only her mind "with speeds comparable to the able-bodied" and with a 91.6% accuracy rate.
Civil Liberties
6. The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously passed a bill that would require law enforcement to actually get warrants to read private emails, no matter how old the email is. The bill will now go to the full Senate, and if it passes there, would also need to pass the House and be signed by Obama, but at least it's a step in the right direction.
Technology
7. Self-driving cars are inching closer to reality. Ford plans to introduce cars that can drive for you in stressful stop-and-go traffic, possibly by 2015. But Volvo will beat them to the punch with cars that can drive themselves at slow speeds in 2014. Meanwhile, a company called Rio Tinto is already using ten driverless trucks to transport iron ore, with plans to expand to 150 over the next few years.
8. 3D printing is coming to a store near you, at least in Europe. Staples will be offering 3D printing services next year in The Netherlands and Belgium. No doubt the US will soon follow, if this turns out to be profitable for them. Meanwhile, Virginia Tech is providing 3D printing free for students (ht). Researchers in Britain are also having some success in printing electronics.
9. From Planetary Resources, a nearly hour-long video with a great amount of detail on the work they're doing to mine asteroids. Early in the video, Eric Anderson says, "The fact of the matter is that the population of the planet has grown a lot over the last couple hundred years, and people live longer, people live much better lives. It's really an extraordinary time to be alive. And yet, we're just at the cusp of doing some of the more incredibly exciting things that we never thought were possible before."
Some more highlights:
Economics
11. In the US, household net worth is the highest it's been since 2007, and higher than any point prior to 2006. The total value of US real estate is also on the rise for the first time since 2006.
12. Don Boudreaux is in the midst of a series of blog entries detailing how everyday items are both less expensive and higher quality today than in 1956, based on an old Sears catalog from that year. So far, he's included women's clothing, bedsheets and lawn care. Mark Perry has made similar observations using other old advertisements, including dishwashers and home entertainment.
And finally, not a reason for optimism, but rather a quote from Winston Churchill: "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
The Best of Humanity
1. Buzzfeed profiles some of the heroes of Sandy Hook. A single man embodied the worst that humanity can be and caused enormous suffering. But these six women stood up to the challenge and saved dozens of lives, some at the cost of their own.
2. Buzzfeed also has a list of "26 Moments that Restored Our Faith in Humanity." My favorites include the responses to Hurricane Sandy at #4 and #5, the man with the arthritic dog at #23, and the "parents of the year" at #24.
Health
3. This infographic, covering the leading causes of death since 1900, has some great reasons for optimism. The number one cause of death in 2010 was heart disease, but the deaths caused by heart disease have fallen steadily since their peak in the 60s, from about 370 to 193 per 100,000. Deaths from the second-worst killer, cancer, have also been falling since they peaked in the early 90s.
4. Scientists in the UK have successfully spurred nerve regeneration in paralyzed dogs by transplanting cells from the dogs' own noses to the injured areas. It remains to be seen if the technique will work in humans, but over several months, the dogs went from complete paralysis in the rear legs to being able to walk on a treadmill without assistance.
5. Jan Scheuermann, who is paralyzed from the neck down, can now operate a robotic arm using only her mind "with speeds comparable to the able-bodied" and with a 91.6% accuracy rate.
Civil Liberties
6. The Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously passed a bill that would require law enforcement to actually get warrants to read private emails, no matter how old the email is. The bill will now go to the full Senate, and if it passes there, would also need to pass the House and be signed by Obama, but at least it's a step in the right direction.
Technology
7. Self-driving cars are inching closer to reality. Ford plans to introduce cars that can drive for you in stressful stop-and-go traffic, possibly by 2015. But Volvo will beat them to the punch with cars that can drive themselves at slow speeds in 2014. Meanwhile, a company called Rio Tinto is already using ten driverless trucks to transport iron ore, with plans to expand to 150 over the next few years.
8. 3D printing is coming to a store near you, at least in Europe. Staples will be offering 3D printing services next year in The Netherlands and Belgium. No doubt the US will soon follow, if this turns out to be profitable for them. Meanwhile, Virginia Tech is providing 3D printing free for students (ht). Researchers in Britain are also having some success in printing electronics.
9. From Planetary Resources, a nearly hour-long video with a great amount of detail on the work they're doing to mine asteroids. Early in the video, Eric Anderson says, "The fact of the matter is that the population of the planet has grown a lot over the last couple hundred years, and people live longer, people live much better lives. It's really an extraordinary time to be alive. And yet, we're just at the cusp of doing some of the more incredibly exciting things that we never thought were possible before."
Some more highlights:
- 17% of near-Earth asteroids are easier to reach than the surface of the moon.
- Platinum-group metals are usually mined in concentrations of a few parts per billion and have an average price of $1500 per ounce. A single 500-meter asteroid has more of these metals than have been mined from Earth in the history of humanity.
- Anderson: "Some of the naysayers to asteroid mining say, well gee, if you bring back all the platinum, then the price will crash. And I say, great. I would love to see that. I would like to see a world of abundance."
Economics
11. In the US, household net worth is the highest it's been since 2007, and higher than any point prior to 2006. The total value of US real estate is also on the rise for the first time since 2006.
12. Don Boudreaux is in the midst of a series of blog entries detailing how everyday items are both less expensive and higher quality today than in 1956, based on an old Sears catalog from that year. So far, he's included women's clothing, bedsheets and lawn care. Mark Perry has made similar observations using other old advertisements, including dishwashers and home entertainment.
And finally, not a reason for optimism, but rather a quote from Winston Churchill: "A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Taxes in the Fiscal Cliff
It is becoming increasingly clear that we are not going to make it into 2013 without tax increases. If we go over the fiscal cliff, taxes are going up, but Democrats have made clear that any negotiated deal would include increased taxes as well. Assuming we do go over the cliff, what would those taxes look like?
On the other hand, even if Congress does not reach a deal to avoid the cliff, I expect a minor deal to avoid the AMT. After all, Congress has enacted one-year patches to the AMT every year for more than a decade, under both Republican and Democratic Congresses, as well as under the split control we've seen since 2010. This year should be no different.
On the Bush tax cuts, Obama was reelected after campaigning to raise taxes on the wealthy. If no deal is reached, Obama gets his wish; the Bush cuts expire and taxes are raised on the wealthy (and everyone else). The Republicans really don't have any leverage on this issue, so I expect any deal would only keep the Bush cuts for those below some income level, probably $200k or $250k.
The real uncertainty is the payroll tax cut. Normally, I would expect Democrats to abhor the cut on the grounds that it undermines Social Security. Republicans should celebrate it, not only as a tax cut, but because it undermines a massive entrenched entitlement. And yet, in some sleight of hand I still haven't figured out, Obama got the Republicans to oppose (and Democrats to support) a tax cut on every worker in the country. Now that the election is over, will the parties stick to these flipped roles, or revert to their principles? Or will the payroll tax cut expire with no one paying attention?
What Republicans Should Do
Whatever happens with the rest of the fiscal cliff, the rich (and people who work for the rich) are going to get hosed. Obama will probably get his way on the Bush tax cuts, and many of the Obamacare taxes are also aimed at the rich. Health costs are also going to go up, but I think the smart insurance companies have already raised their rates to compensate. There may not be a noticeable increase in premiums because the increase has already happened.
Given this, Republicans need to refocus on what good they can still do. Taxes are going up, and with Obama's reelection, that was inevitable. But if Republicans are smart and tactful, they can still keep taxes low for most of us. Give Obama the tax hike on the rich, since that will happen even with no deal, but secure the payroll tax cut and the Bush cuts for the non-rich in exchange. Obama himself is campaigning for the latter, so this should be easy to do, if Republicans are willing to do it.
- New Obamacare taxes would come into effect.
- The Alternative Minimum Tax would return to full strength.
- The Bush tax cuts would expire.
- The payroll tax cut would expire.
On the other hand, even if Congress does not reach a deal to avoid the cliff, I expect a minor deal to avoid the AMT. After all, Congress has enacted one-year patches to the AMT every year for more than a decade, under both Republican and Democratic Congresses, as well as under the split control we've seen since 2010. This year should be no different.
On the Bush tax cuts, Obama was reelected after campaigning to raise taxes on the wealthy. If no deal is reached, Obama gets his wish; the Bush cuts expire and taxes are raised on the wealthy (and everyone else). The Republicans really don't have any leverage on this issue, so I expect any deal would only keep the Bush cuts for those below some income level, probably $200k or $250k.
The real uncertainty is the payroll tax cut. Normally, I would expect Democrats to abhor the cut on the grounds that it undermines Social Security. Republicans should celebrate it, not only as a tax cut, but because it undermines a massive entrenched entitlement. And yet, in some sleight of hand I still haven't figured out, Obama got the Republicans to oppose (and Democrats to support) a tax cut on every worker in the country. Now that the election is over, will the parties stick to these flipped roles, or revert to their principles? Or will the payroll tax cut expire with no one paying attention?
What Republicans Should Do
Whatever happens with the rest of the fiscal cliff, the rich (and people who work for the rich) are going to get hosed. Obama will probably get his way on the Bush tax cuts, and many of the Obamacare taxes are also aimed at the rich. Health costs are also going to go up, but I think the smart insurance companies have already raised their rates to compensate. There may not be a noticeable increase in premiums because the increase has already happened.
Given this, Republicans need to refocus on what good they can still do. Taxes are going up, and with Obama's reelection, that was inevitable. But if Republicans are smart and tactful, they can still keep taxes low for most of us. Give Obama the tax hike on the rich, since that will happen even with no deal, but secure the payroll tax cut and the Bush cuts for the non-rich in exchange. Obama himself is campaigning for the latter, so this should be easy to do, if Republicans are willing to do it.
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
Aftermath: Reflections on Obama's Re-election
Barack Obama has been re-elected President of the United States.
For starters, Gary Johnson was not a spoiler. While the results are still coming in, as of 11:30pm Pacific, there was not a single state won by Obama where Romney would have won even if every Johnson voter had voted for Romney instead.
Second, there is no mandate. While Obama won, he won with a far narrower lead in both the popular vote and the electoral college than he had in 2008. While Democrats increased their lead in the Senate, Republicans increased their lead in governorships, and the House is on track to be more or less the same as it was. This was very much a status quo election.
On the whole, will we be better or worse with Obama as president?
First of all, expect the fiscal cliff to stay in place. After all, we just re-elected most of the people who put it there to begin with. While I haven't spent too much time learning about the fiscal cliff, Wikipedia claims a 19.63% increase in revenue and a 0.25% decrease in spending, or a nearly 80-to-1 ratio of tax hikes to spending cuts. This will not end well-- and even if our new old government leaders manage to avoid the cliff, the re-elected Obama is in a prime position to extract concessions he was unable to before the election. Any compromise will include more tax hikes than spending cuts, if spending is actually cut at all.
Second, Obamacare will be implemented fully over the next few years. Expect the nation's health, freedom and balance sheet to all suffer. Although to be honest, I don't believe Romney would have done any better.
The national debt will continue to grow. If the fiscal cliff causes a second recession, expect more stimulus and bailouts, probably for Europe too. We may look back at $1.5 trillion deficits and laugh about how small they were. On the other hand, the same probably would've happened under Romney, considering his plan to index military spending to 4% of GDP.
On other long-term important issues, I don't expect Obama to do much of anything. He'll keep ignoring space (mercifully), Social Security will continue to stumble forward without reform, trade deals will be forgotten, immigration won't change. We'll mostly withdraw from Afghanistan on schedule, although the lack of attention the war gets these days means we'll probably keep troops there for the long haul, same as we've still got troops in Germany, Japan and Korea. On trade and Afghanistan, at least, Romney would have been even worse. While Romney may have avoided the fiscal cliff, his insistence to go after China on trade might have been just as bad for the economy.
The main difference between the two candidates in terms of our long-term welfare is this: With Obama's victory, 2016 will see another wide-open primary for Republicans, where we'll have another shot at nominating a true spokesperson for liberty. Had Romney won, we wouldn't get that chance until 2020. So hold onto your hats. It's gonna be a rough four years for liberty, but we made it through the last four. We'll make it this time, too.
For starters, Gary Johnson was not a spoiler. While the results are still coming in, as of 11:30pm Pacific, there was not a single state won by Obama where Romney would have won even if every Johnson voter had voted for Romney instead.
Second, there is no mandate. While Obama won, he won with a far narrower lead in both the popular vote and the electoral college than he had in 2008. While Democrats increased their lead in the Senate, Republicans increased their lead in governorships, and the House is on track to be more or less the same as it was. This was very much a status quo election.
On the whole, will we be better or worse with Obama as president?
First of all, expect the fiscal cliff to stay in place. After all, we just re-elected most of the people who put it there to begin with. While I haven't spent too much time learning about the fiscal cliff, Wikipedia claims a 19.63% increase in revenue and a 0.25% decrease in spending, or a nearly 80-to-1 ratio of tax hikes to spending cuts. This will not end well-- and even if our new old government leaders manage to avoid the cliff, the re-elected Obama is in a prime position to extract concessions he was unable to before the election. Any compromise will include more tax hikes than spending cuts, if spending is actually cut at all.
Second, Obamacare will be implemented fully over the next few years. Expect the nation's health, freedom and balance sheet to all suffer. Although to be honest, I don't believe Romney would have done any better.
The national debt will continue to grow. If the fiscal cliff causes a second recession, expect more stimulus and bailouts, probably for Europe too. We may look back at $1.5 trillion deficits and laugh about how small they were. On the other hand, the same probably would've happened under Romney, considering his plan to index military spending to 4% of GDP.
On other long-term important issues, I don't expect Obama to do much of anything. He'll keep ignoring space (mercifully), Social Security will continue to stumble forward without reform, trade deals will be forgotten, immigration won't change. We'll mostly withdraw from Afghanistan on schedule, although the lack of attention the war gets these days means we'll probably keep troops there for the long haul, same as we've still got troops in Germany, Japan and Korea. On trade and Afghanistan, at least, Romney would have been even worse. While Romney may have avoided the fiscal cliff, his insistence to go after China on trade might have been just as bad for the economy.
The main difference between the two candidates in terms of our long-term welfare is this: With Obama's victory, 2016 will see another wide-open primary for Republicans, where we'll have another shot at nominating a true spokesperson for liberty. Had Romney won, we wouldn't get that chance until 2020. So hold onto your hats. It's gonna be a rough four years for liberty, but we made it through the last four. We'll make it this time, too.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
The Issue of the Day - Updated
(Update at the end.)
With the Obamacare ruling expected in a few hours, here's my in-before-the-deadline thoughts on the individual mandate. Not being a constitutional lawyer myself, as far as I can tell there are three clauses in the US Constitution that might make the individual mandate constitutional. The first and most easily dismissed is the Commerce Clause; second is the Necessary and Proper Clause; third, with the most relevance, is the Tax and Spending Clause.
The Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce. If that is taken to mean actual interstate commerce, the Commerce Clause would be completely irrelevant here. Almost every state specifically prohibits its residents from purchasing out-of-state health insurance. There is no interstate health insurance market, and that is a direct, deliberate result of government policy. How then, can Congress regulate interstate commerce that doesn't even exist? Interstate commerce doesn't mean that lots of states have their own intrastate commerce. Interstate commerce has to be between states, which for most states is specifically forbidden when it comes to health insurance. At best, the Commerce Clause might allow a health insurance mandate for the three states (RI, WY, GA) that allow out-of-state insurance. Now, I haven't seen any legal expert even mention what I'm talking about, so maybe there's a really awesome legal argument for why I'm wrong. But until I find out what that is, this just seems like common sense to me.
The Necessary and Proper Clause allows Congress to do things that aren't authorized elsewhere, but that are necessary and proper to do things that are authorized elsewhere. The problem is, you won't find "health insurance" in Congress' enumerated powers. Lots of people say it's included in the Commerce Clause (see above), and I suppose it might be counted under "general welfare." But that seems like a stretch to me. Even if the public health is included in "general welfare," when you get to the point of mandating individual citizens to buy specific products from private parties, you've gone way beyond either public health or general welfare.
Even if health insurance is included under "general welfare," it's not clear to me that the individual mandate is either necessary or proper. I understand that the mandate is necessary to prevent the insurance industry from collapsing under the weight of the rest of Obamacare, but that hardly seems like a proper use of the word necessary. That's like me holding Hank's head under water, and then saying it's necessary for you to go buy scuba gear for Hank so he doesn't drown. Giving Congress extra powers to undo damage caused by exercising their other powers just seems like a bad idea to me-- the phrase perverse incentives comes to mind.
The Tax and Spending Clause allows Congress to basically tax whatever they want, as long as it applies equally throughout the country. If the individual mandate is a tax, I think it would pretty clearly be constitutional via the Tax and Spending Clause. The federal government has all kinds of taxes and credits and deductions for very specific, very personal individual behaviors, like buying a house or having a kid or giving to a list of federally-approved charities. I can't see how these would be allowed but health insurance wouldn't be.
In legal circles, the big debate is whether the mandate actually is a tax (which is allowed) or a penalty (which isn't allowed). What's the real difference? There isn't one. Right now, the law explicitly calls the mandate a "penalty," but every instance of "penalty" could be replaced with "tax" and the meaning would be no different. In fact, Congress did exactly that in the other direction-- early drafts called the mandate a tax, but the final law calls the same mandate a penalty. They do exactly the same thing. So why is one constitutional and the other not? As far as I can tell, because constitutional law is stupid. That link makes it a bit difficult to end on that note, but I really don't have a better explanation.
Conclusion
I have no idea how the Supreme Court will actually rule in a few hours, nor is this an attempt to guess, or to sort out the legal arguments. This is just my attempt at a common sense approach to the Constitution, which is admittedly something even the Founders never intended. I may be way off-base, but based on my interpretation, the individual mandate cannot be justified under the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause. It probably can be justified under the Tax and Spending Clause, and even if it can't, it could be with a nearly-identical law that does the same thing but explicitly calls it a tax instead of a penalty.
Update
The full text of the ruling (193 pages) is here in PDF form. It looks like the Court agreed with me that the Commerce and Necessary & Proper Clauses do not allow an individual mandate, although for different reasons than mine. I was apparently wrong that the mandate would be unconstitutional if you called it a penalty but constitutional if you called it a tax-- constitutional law is more internally consistent (ie less stupid) than I thought. At the same time, Roberts and the four liberal justices ruled that the mandate is not a tax for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act (ruling otherwise would have prevented the Court from even considering the case), while it is a tax for purposes of the Tax & Spending Clause. In other words, constitutional law is both more and less internally consistent than I thought. (Decide for yourself how that impacts my own internal consistency.)
I still think the individual mandate is a horrible policy, even if it is constitutional. I sincerely hope we can repeal it in 2013. I'm encouraged that individual mandates are not constitutional under the Commerce or Necessary & Proper Clauses; to be passed, they must now be passed as taxes, which will be more politically difficult. The libertarian in me also hopes that this prompts the nation into taking a good, hard look at our tax code and the wide-ranging tax powers our government has. Maybe it's time for a constitutional amendment restricting Congress' tax power.
With the Obamacare ruling expected in a few hours, here's my in-before-the-deadline thoughts on the individual mandate. Not being a constitutional lawyer myself, as far as I can tell there are three clauses in the US Constitution that might make the individual mandate constitutional. The first and most easily dismissed is the Commerce Clause; second is the Necessary and Proper Clause; third, with the most relevance, is the Tax and Spending Clause.
The Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate interstate commerce. If that is taken to mean actual interstate commerce, the Commerce Clause would be completely irrelevant here. Almost every state specifically prohibits its residents from purchasing out-of-state health insurance. There is no interstate health insurance market, and that is a direct, deliberate result of government policy. How then, can Congress regulate interstate commerce that doesn't even exist? Interstate commerce doesn't mean that lots of states have their own intrastate commerce. Interstate commerce has to be between states, which for most states is specifically forbidden when it comes to health insurance. At best, the Commerce Clause might allow a health insurance mandate for the three states (RI, WY, GA) that allow out-of-state insurance. Now, I haven't seen any legal expert even mention what I'm talking about, so maybe there's a really awesome legal argument for why I'm wrong. But until I find out what that is, this just seems like common sense to me.
The Necessary and Proper Clause allows Congress to do things that aren't authorized elsewhere, but that are necessary and proper to do things that are authorized elsewhere. The problem is, you won't find "health insurance" in Congress' enumerated powers. Lots of people say it's included in the Commerce Clause (see above), and I suppose it might be counted under "general welfare." But that seems like a stretch to me. Even if the public health is included in "general welfare," when you get to the point of mandating individual citizens to buy specific products from private parties, you've gone way beyond either public health or general welfare.
Even if health insurance is included under "general welfare," it's not clear to me that the individual mandate is either necessary or proper. I understand that the mandate is necessary to prevent the insurance industry from collapsing under the weight of the rest of Obamacare, but that hardly seems like a proper use of the word necessary. That's like me holding Hank's head under water, and then saying it's necessary for you to go buy scuba gear for Hank so he doesn't drown. Giving Congress extra powers to undo damage caused by exercising their other powers just seems like a bad idea to me-- the phrase perverse incentives comes to mind.
The Tax and Spending Clause allows Congress to basically tax whatever they want, as long as it applies equally throughout the country. If the individual mandate is a tax, I think it would pretty clearly be constitutional via the Tax and Spending Clause. The federal government has all kinds of taxes and credits and deductions for very specific, very personal individual behaviors, like buying a house or having a kid or giving to a list of federally-approved charities. I can't see how these would be allowed but health insurance wouldn't be.
In legal circles, the big debate is whether the mandate actually is a tax (which is allowed) or a penalty (which isn't allowed). What's the real difference? There isn't one. Right now, the law explicitly calls the mandate a "penalty," but every instance of "penalty" could be replaced with "tax" and the meaning would be no different. In fact, Congress did exactly that in the other direction-- early drafts called the mandate a tax, but the final law calls the same mandate a penalty. They do exactly the same thing. So why is one constitutional and the other not? As far as I can tell, because constitutional law is stupid. That link makes it a bit difficult to end on that note, but I really don't have a better explanation.
Conclusion
I have no idea how the Supreme Court will actually rule in a few hours, nor is this an attempt to guess, or to sort out the legal arguments. This is just my attempt at a common sense approach to the Constitution, which is admittedly something even the Founders never intended. I may be way off-base, but based on my interpretation, the individual mandate cannot be justified under the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause. It probably can be justified under the Tax and Spending Clause, and even if it can't, it could be with a nearly-identical law that does the same thing but explicitly calls it a tax instead of a penalty.
Update
The full text of the ruling (193 pages) is here in PDF form. It looks like the Court agreed with me that the Commerce and Necessary & Proper Clauses do not allow an individual mandate, although for different reasons than mine. I was apparently wrong that the mandate would be unconstitutional if you called it a penalty but constitutional if you called it a tax-- constitutional law is more internally consistent (ie less stupid) than I thought. At the same time, Roberts and the four liberal justices ruled that the mandate is not a tax for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act (ruling otherwise would have prevented the Court from even considering the case), while it is a tax for purposes of the Tax & Spending Clause. In other words, constitutional law is both more and less internally consistent than I thought. (Decide for yourself how that impacts my own internal consistency.)
I still think the individual mandate is a horrible policy, even if it is constitutional. I sincerely hope we can repeal it in 2013. I'm encouraged that individual mandates are not constitutional under the Commerce or Necessary & Proper Clauses; to be passed, they must now be passed as taxes, which will be more politically difficult. The libertarian in me also hopes that this prompts the nation into taking a good, hard look at our tax code and the wide-ranging tax powers our government has. Maybe it's time for a constitutional amendment restricting Congress' tax power.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
Recent Reasons for Optimism V
The latest installment of recent reasons for optimism was a bit delayed on account of this being the tenth day of a ten-day workweek for me. But that doesn't mean there was any less good news! There's been lots of good news in health, but there's also reasons for optimism on the economy, civil liberties and even the threat of asteroid impact.
Health
1. First the bad news-- the cytomegalovirus (CMV) infects 50-80% of people in the US, UK and Australia, and decreases life expectancy as much as smoking or drinking because of its unique effects on the immune system. Now the good news-- researchers at the University of Birmingham are working on an antiviral drug to reverse CMV's effects, potentially adding years to life expectancy. The drug has shown promise in mice, and tests on humans will begin soon. Finally, the great news-- researchers at the University of Connecticut at Farmington have genetically modified CMV to take advantage of what it does to the immune system. The result is a self-reinforcing cancer vaccine. In a study on mice, an untreated control group died of cancer within 23 days; the CMV-treated group lived for the entire length of the study.
2. A new breathalyzer can detect some kinds of cancer on your breath (ht Jason Silva). Although currently less accurate than more complicated tests, it's also far less costly, and could provide cancer screening to the poor around the world who can't afford current tests.
3. One more on cancer: Researchers have developed a patch (that looks very much like the birth control patch) that completely eliminated a certain kind of skin cancer after wearing it just three times, for three hours each. It was a very small trial, with just ten patients, but three months later the cancer was still gone from all ten patients, and after six months, there was no cancer in eight out of ten patients.
4. In Sweden, doctors have successfully transplanted a vein into a 10-year-old girl without the use of immunosuppressive drugs. They accomplished the feat by removing all of the donor's cells from the vein and replacing them with the girl's own stem cells.
Cyborgs and Robotics
5. We're one step closer to brain implants, as a team from MIT has invented a fuel cell to convert glucose in the brain into electricity that can be used by implants or prosthetics. (ht MR)
6. Picking up different kinds of objects is difficult and expensive for robots, especially when the shape of the object may not be known in advance. In an amazing example of the simplicity of innovation, a team at Cornell has found a solution using a balloon and ground coffee.
Economics
7. I've mentioned before on this blog that world income is higher than ever before and steadily increasing. Matt Ridley shares a graph showing that not only is world income higher, it's also more equitable.
8. Great news for free-traders: Both Mexico and Canada have now joined the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations. The TPP, originally an agreement between New Zealand, Chile, Brunei and Singapore, is now being expanded to include the three NAFTA countries, the US, Canada and Mexico, as well as Japan, Australia, Peru, Vietnam and Malaysia. If an agreement is reached between all these countries, the TPP would become the largest free trade area in the world, comprising a full third of world GDP.
Civil Liberties and Crime
9. The Canadian government has backed down from their plan to record private conversations at border crossings and airports. What makes this even more encouraging is that this rapid about-face came in a non-election year, with the Conservatives' majority solidly in place until 2015. And it may not be just the Canadian government-- the US Department of State has withdrawn a request for bids to develop a system to monitor social media.
10. New Yorkers are striking back against that city's "stop and frisk" policy with a new app that allows New Yorkers to easily record and share video of police encounters and report them to the NYCLU. This is a small example of advancing technology being used to protect civil liberties.
11. Crime is down across-the-board. Violent crime fell by 4% from 2010 to 2011, the fifth year in a row it's fallen. That's true across the country, with every region except the Northeast seeing a drop of 4.5% or more. Property crimes were also down for the ninth year in a row, down 0.8% from 2010.
Everything Else
12. NASA scientists say there is little to no threat of a civilization-ending asteroid strike. Lindley Johnson of the Near Earth Object Observation Program says, "We know everything out there that is that big, and there is just nothing right now that's in an orbit that's any threat toward the Earth."
13. Ed Krayewski at Reason lists the "top 5 pieces of good news in the bad news." Some of his reasoning is a bit strained, but it's nevertheless an interesting list.
14. For even more optimism, check out these "21 Pictures That Will Restore Your Faith in Humanity." Among the obligatory pictures of people rescuing animals, there's a Subway restaurant giving free food to the homeless, a dry cleaner's offering free cleaning for the unemployed for job interviews, and the story of the Japanese seniors who volunteered to clean the radiation at Fukushima so the young wouldn't have to.
Health
1. First the bad news-- the cytomegalovirus (CMV) infects 50-80% of people in the US, UK and Australia, and decreases life expectancy as much as smoking or drinking because of its unique effects on the immune system. Now the good news-- researchers at the University of Birmingham are working on an antiviral drug to reverse CMV's effects, potentially adding years to life expectancy. The drug has shown promise in mice, and tests on humans will begin soon. Finally, the great news-- researchers at the University of Connecticut at Farmington have genetically modified CMV to take advantage of what it does to the immune system. The result is a self-reinforcing cancer vaccine. In a study on mice, an untreated control group died of cancer within 23 days; the CMV-treated group lived for the entire length of the study.
2. A new breathalyzer can detect some kinds of cancer on your breath (ht Jason Silva). Although currently less accurate than more complicated tests, it's also far less costly, and could provide cancer screening to the poor around the world who can't afford current tests.
3. One more on cancer: Researchers have developed a patch (that looks very much like the birth control patch) that completely eliminated a certain kind of skin cancer after wearing it just three times, for three hours each. It was a very small trial, with just ten patients, but three months later the cancer was still gone from all ten patients, and after six months, there was no cancer in eight out of ten patients.
4. In Sweden, doctors have successfully transplanted a vein into a 10-year-old girl without the use of immunosuppressive drugs. They accomplished the feat by removing all of the donor's cells from the vein and replacing them with the girl's own stem cells.
Cyborgs and Robotics
5. We're one step closer to brain implants, as a team from MIT has invented a fuel cell to convert glucose in the brain into electricity that can be used by implants or prosthetics. (ht MR)
6. Picking up different kinds of objects is difficult and expensive for robots, especially when the shape of the object may not be known in advance. In an amazing example of the simplicity of innovation, a team at Cornell has found a solution using a balloon and ground coffee.
Economics
7. I've mentioned before on this blog that world income is higher than ever before and steadily increasing. Matt Ridley shares a graph showing that not only is world income higher, it's also more equitable.
8. Great news for free-traders: Both Mexico and Canada have now joined the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations. The TPP, originally an agreement between New Zealand, Chile, Brunei and Singapore, is now being expanded to include the three NAFTA countries, the US, Canada and Mexico, as well as Japan, Australia, Peru, Vietnam and Malaysia. If an agreement is reached between all these countries, the TPP would become the largest free trade area in the world, comprising a full third of world GDP.
Civil Liberties and Crime
9. The Canadian government has backed down from their plan to record private conversations at border crossings and airports. What makes this even more encouraging is that this rapid about-face came in a non-election year, with the Conservatives' majority solidly in place until 2015. And it may not be just the Canadian government-- the US Department of State has withdrawn a request for bids to develop a system to monitor social media.
10. New Yorkers are striking back against that city's "stop and frisk" policy with a new app that allows New Yorkers to easily record and share video of police encounters and report them to the NYCLU. This is a small example of advancing technology being used to protect civil liberties.
11. Crime is down across-the-board. Violent crime fell by 4% from 2010 to 2011, the fifth year in a row it's fallen. That's true across the country, with every region except the Northeast seeing a drop of 4.5% or more. Property crimes were also down for the ninth year in a row, down 0.8% from 2010.
Everything Else
12. NASA scientists say there is little to no threat of a civilization-ending asteroid strike. Lindley Johnson of the Near Earth Object Observation Program says, "We know everything out there that is that big, and there is just nothing right now that's in an orbit that's any threat toward the Earth."
13. Ed Krayewski at Reason lists the "top 5 pieces of good news in the bad news." Some of his reasoning is a bit strained, but it's nevertheless an interesting list.
14. For even more optimism, check out these "21 Pictures That Will Restore Your Faith in Humanity." Among the obligatory pictures of people rescuing animals, there's a Subway restaurant giving free food to the homeless, a dry cleaner's offering free cleaning for the unemployed for job interviews, and the story of the Japanese seniors who volunteered to clean the radiation at Fukushima so the young wouldn't have to.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
Recent Reasons for Optimism IV: A New Hope
1. Robin Hanson tackles general pessimism about the future with a comparison to modern high-rise apartments.
2. The New York Times (ht MR) has a list of 32 innovations, some minor, some major, that could change the world in the near future. The innovations range from better-tasting coffee to biosensors in your underwear and on your teeth to synthetic, hangover-free alcohol.
3. The New York Times also examines the "commercial ecosystem" created by the Kinect and Kinect hackers. As I've mentioned before, the Kinect is one of the best recent examples of the Matt Ridley quote on the sidebar here: "The more we prosper, the more we can prosper. The more we invent, the more inventions become possible. The world of things is often subject to diminishing returns. The world of ideas is not."
4. We keep inching closer to a cure for cancer. Some new treatments are able to target cancer cells more directly, while others encourage the immune system to attack the cancer itself.
5. We're also inching closer to driverless cars and the benefits they would bring. A Korean company, Chumdancha, has released several videos of their car driving down a busy highway with the human in the backseat, although it doesn't seem to be as advanced as Google's yet. Also check out this video (ht Driverless Car HQ) from the University of Texas at Austin illustrating "autonomous intersection management." When crossing an intersection no longer relies on human reaction times, we'll never have to wait at traffic lights again. Starting at about 0:51 in the embedded video, you can see their simulation of what that might look like. (I hope driverless cars come with tinted windows!)
6. Moore's Law is a little more secure now. With electronic computers projected to hit up against hard physical limitations within a decade or so, quantum computers have taken a step closer to replacing electronics. A collaboration including Simon Fraser University was able to keep qubits embedded in silicon stable for over three minutes. That shatters the previous record of just a few seconds and opens the door to hybrid electronic-quantum computers.
7. Those with leprosy will be cured, but also, burn victims. A three-year-old South African girl is recovering from severe burns to more than 80% of her body thanks to new skin grafts cloned from her own skin in Boston, then flown to her hospital in Johannesburg. This story highlights not only the great potential of cloning technologies for medical use, but the increasingly globalized scope of medical care.
8. Need even more optimism? Joshua at PostLibertarian has five more reasons for optimism.
2. The New York Times (ht MR) has a list of 32 innovations, some minor, some major, that could change the world in the near future. The innovations range from better-tasting coffee to biosensors in your underwear and on your teeth to synthetic, hangover-free alcohol.
3. The New York Times also examines the "commercial ecosystem" created by the Kinect and Kinect hackers. As I've mentioned before, the Kinect is one of the best recent examples of the Matt Ridley quote on the sidebar here: "The more we prosper, the more we can prosper. The more we invent, the more inventions become possible. The world of things is often subject to diminishing returns. The world of ideas is not."
4. We keep inching closer to a cure for cancer. Some new treatments are able to target cancer cells more directly, while others encourage the immune system to attack the cancer itself.
5. We're also inching closer to driverless cars and the benefits they would bring. A Korean company, Chumdancha, has released several videos of their car driving down a busy highway with the human in the backseat, although it doesn't seem to be as advanced as Google's yet. Also check out this video (ht Driverless Car HQ) from the University of Texas at Austin illustrating "autonomous intersection management." When crossing an intersection no longer relies on human reaction times, we'll never have to wait at traffic lights again. Starting at about 0:51 in the embedded video, you can see their simulation of what that might look like. (I hope driverless cars come with tinted windows!)
6. Moore's Law is a little more secure now. With electronic computers projected to hit up against hard physical limitations within a decade or so, quantum computers have taken a step closer to replacing electronics. A collaboration including Simon Fraser University was able to keep qubits embedded in silicon stable for over three minutes. That shatters the previous record of just a few seconds and opens the door to hybrid electronic-quantum computers.
7. Those with leprosy will be cured, but also, burn victims. A three-year-old South African girl is recovering from severe burns to more than 80% of her body thanks to new skin grafts cloned from her own skin in Boston, then flown to her hospital in Johannesburg. This story highlights not only the great potential of cloning technologies for medical use, but the increasingly globalized scope of medical care.
8. Need even more optimism? Joshua at PostLibertarian has five more reasons for optimism.
Friday, June 8, 2012
Romney, Obama and the Big Diversion
Apparently, Romney's latest talking point is that Obama "knowingly" slowed the economic recovery by focusing on passing health care reform rather than improving the economy. Sigh. Never mind whether this is true or not. If you believe half the rhetoric that comes out of the Romney camp on what should be done about the economy, you should be happy that Obama set his sights on health care instead!
Look at what Obama did when he actually was focused on the economy. There were the auto and bank bailouts, then the $800 billion "stimulus" that ended up as mostly just a bailout for state and local governments. Then there was Cash for Clunkers. Once health care reform was done, there was Dodd-Frank, plus talk of a second stimulus that never got anywhere. And since 2010, Obama's economic plan has primarily consisted of taxing the rich and insisting the stimulus worked.
To be fair, part of that stimulus included tax cuts, and there is the payroll tax cut. I suppose it's possible that, if Obama had focused on the economy instead of health care, he would have passed more tax cuts instead of more spending, more bailouts, pushing Dodd-Frank through a few months earlier or even raising taxes. It's possible, sure, if you believe it. But the reality is, if Obama actually had focused on the economy more, we just would have seen more of the same policies that conservatives never wanted in the first place. If you believe conservative ideas are what the economy really needs to recover, you should be happy Obama got distracted by health care!
Is this a sign that Romney doesn't really believe conservative ideas are what the economy needs? Perhaps, but that's probably reading too much into it. More likely, Romney is just appealing to the old idea that government should just do something, no matter what it is, and that being seen to be doing something is more important than what you're actually doing. Romney sees an opportunity to attack Obama for looking like he didn't do enough, even though what he would have done would have made things worse. Hopefully Romney loses that old idea before he moves into the White House and starts to actually govern.
Look at what Obama did when he actually was focused on the economy. There were the auto and bank bailouts, then the $800 billion "stimulus" that ended up as mostly just a bailout for state and local governments. Then there was Cash for Clunkers. Once health care reform was done, there was Dodd-Frank, plus talk of a second stimulus that never got anywhere. And since 2010, Obama's economic plan has primarily consisted of taxing the rich and insisting the stimulus worked.
To be fair, part of that stimulus included tax cuts, and there is the payroll tax cut. I suppose it's possible that, if Obama had focused on the economy instead of health care, he would have passed more tax cuts instead of more spending, more bailouts, pushing Dodd-Frank through a few months earlier or even raising taxes. It's possible, sure, if you believe it. But the reality is, if Obama actually had focused on the economy more, we just would have seen more of the same policies that conservatives never wanted in the first place. If you believe conservative ideas are what the economy really needs to recover, you should be happy Obama got distracted by health care!
Is this a sign that Romney doesn't really believe conservative ideas are what the economy needs? Perhaps, but that's probably reading too much into it. More likely, Romney is just appealing to the old idea that government should just do something, no matter what it is, and that being seen to be doing something is more important than what you're actually doing. Romney sees an opportunity to attack Obama for looking like he didn't do enough, even though what he would have done would have made things worse. Hopefully Romney loses that old idea before he moves into the White House and starts to actually govern.
Monday, June 4, 2012
Recent Reasons for Optimism Reloaded
I know "Reloaded" was the second movie, and this is my third Recent Reasons for Optimism entry, but... yeah, I don't have a good reason, so on to the optimism! Space news dominated the week, but there are also reasons to be optimistic about agriculture, health and the economy.
1. For starters, Joshua at PostLibertarian has his own list of reasons for optimism, including SpaceX's success with the Falcon 9, Cubify's new 3D printer and the lowering of legal hurdles for driverless cars. Also check out his previous reasons for optimism, including lower child mortality and improving technologies, among others.
2 Speaking of space, SpaceX has also just signed their first commercial contract for the Falcon Heavy rocket. The Falcon Heavy is basically three Falcon 9's strapped together. When completed, it will be able to take 58.5 tons into orbit, more than double the shuttle's 26.8 tons at less than a quarter of the cost.
3. SpaceX isn't the only good news in space. A company in the UK has announced plans (ht One Per Cent) to launch nanosatellites that, once in orbit, can dock with each other in novel configurations. One of the benefits would be easier in-orbit upgrades to satellites equipped with the technology. In a perfect example of the Matt Ridley quote in the sidebar here, the nanosatellites would use Kinect cameras to sense each other and make docking possible. "The more we invent, the more inventions become possible."
4. Just one more about space: Virgin Galactic has been granted an FAA permit for the first rocket-powered tests of SpaceShipTwo, which will eventually carry tourists into space. They plan to begin those tests this year, with an eye to actual tourist flights starting in 2013-2014.
5. The Free Exchange blog at The Economist reviews two recent books, one painting a picture of an America in decline, the other the opposite. In blogger R.A.'s words, "To spin a story of decline, one has to demonstrate that policies are considerably worse than they used to be, and that they're unlikely to improve. It's actually quite difficult to do this." While there are looming problems, R.A. says, "these issues, and other worries as well, are not being ignored or greeted with complacency," and "American innovation is proving as impressive as ever."
6. Two studies covered at World Climate Report (ht @mattwridley) portend good news for crop yields. Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide helps rice out-compete weeds and encourages more photosynthesis in wheat. Higher temperatures also improve wheat water use efficiency. The scientists predicted that by 2050, global warming would raise wheat yields by about 5.8% in lower altitudes and more than 10% in higher altitudes.
7. A ten-year-old girl, Sammie Hicks, was until recently only able to hear with a hearing aid. In April, she was given a cochlear implant and recorded for Youtube the moment it was finally turned on in May. She jumps as the sounds come in, and adjusts to hearing herself breathe for the first time. In the video, she starts crying, and later said, "It was overwhelming. But the reason I really cried? I couldn’t believe all the stuff I was missing." In a later video, she talks about hearing pencils writing at school, and the wind on her way home.
8. Paralyzed rats with "severe spinal injuries" were effectively cured of their paralysis, regaining the ability to walk after 2-3 weeks and achieving "100% recuperation" after 5-6 weeks of treatment, including a special stimulating device and the ratty equivalent of physical therapy. A similar treatment for humans could be available within just a year or two.
9. The plural of anecdotes is not data. However, anecdotally, in my little corner of the world, the economy seems to be improving. People I know who have been unemployed, some for a very long time, over the last few weeks have been finding jobs. Walking down the street this past week, I've seen "Now Hiring" signs in the windows of local businesses. There are fresh faces working at businesses I frequent, and even the local mall is expanding.
10. With Friday's disappointing employment numbers from the establishment survey, you'd be forgiven for thinking the economic data is all doom and gloom. However, the household survey told a different story. While the establishment survey measured only 69k new jobs, the more-accurate household survey picked up 422k. Even the establishment survey looks better when you look at the private sector, which is where we want the growth to happen anyway. And while the unemployment rate ticked up from 8.1% to 8.2%, this was because the labor force grew by 642k as the long-term non-employed start looking for work again. That's not a bad thing!
11. Finally, a note on optimism itself. The CultureLab blog at New Scientist interviews Elaine Fox, author of the book Rainy Brain, Sunny Brain. Fox believes that we can retrain our brains to become more optimistic. She also cites research on the benefits of optimism, saying, "The research shows that, as long as they are realists too, people who have an optimistic mindset and feel like they are able to cope when things do go wrong benefit in all sorts of ways. The evidence is also quite strong now that an optimistic mindset is beneficial for our health. People with optimistic mindsets are also more successful in business, and seem to live longer."
1. For starters, Joshua at PostLibertarian has his own list of reasons for optimism, including SpaceX's success with the Falcon 9, Cubify's new 3D printer and the lowering of legal hurdles for driverless cars. Also check out his previous reasons for optimism, including lower child mortality and improving technologies, among others.
2 Speaking of space, SpaceX has also just signed their first commercial contract for the Falcon Heavy rocket. The Falcon Heavy is basically three Falcon 9's strapped together. When completed, it will be able to take 58.5 tons into orbit, more than double the shuttle's 26.8 tons at less than a quarter of the cost.
3. SpaceX isn't the only good news in space. A company in the UK has announced plans (ht One Per Cent) to launch nanosatellites that, once in orbit, can dock with each other in novel configurations. One of the benefits would be easier in-orbit upgrades to satellites equipped with the technology. In a perfect example of the Matt Ridley quote in the sidebar here, the nanosatellites would use Kinect cameras to sense each other and make docking possible. "The more we invent, the more inventions become possible."
4. Just one more about space: Virgin Galactic has been granted an FAA permit for the first rocket-powered tests of SpaceShipTwo, which will eventually carry tourists into space. They plan to begin those tests this year, with an eye to actual tourist flights starting in 2013-2014.
5. The Free Exchange blog at The Economist reviews two recent books, one painting a picture of an America in decline, the other the opposite. In blogger R.A.'s words, "To spin a story of decline, one has to demonstrate that policies are considerably worse than they used to be, and that they're unlikely to improve. It's actually quite difficult to do this." While there are looming problems, R.A. says, "these issues, and other worries as well, are not being ignored or greeted with complacency," and "American innovation is proving as impressive as ever."
6. Two studies covered at World Climate Report (ht @mattwridley) portend good news for crop yields. Increased atmospheric carbon dioxide helps rice out-compete weeds and encourages more photosynthesis in wheat. Higher temperatures also improve wheat water use efficiency. The scientists predicted that by 2050, global warming would raise wheat yields by about 5.8% in lower altitudes and more than 10% in higher altitudes.
7. A ten-year-old girl, Sammie Hicks, was until recently only able to hear with a hearing aid. In April, she was given a cochlear implant and recorded for Youtube the moment it was finally turned on in May. She jumps as the sounds come in, and adjusts to hearing herself breathe for the first time. In the video, she starts crying, and later said, "It was overwhelming. But the reason I really cried? I couldn’t believe all the stuff I was missing." In a later video, she talks about hearing pencils writing at school, and the wind on her way home.
8. Paralyzed rats with "severe spinal injuries" were effectively cured of their paralysis, regaining the ability to walk after 2-3 weeks and achieving "100% recuperation" after 5-6 weeks of treatment, including a special stimulating device and the ratty equivalent of physical therapy. A similar treatment for humans could be available within just a year or two.
9. The plural of anecdotes is not data. However, anecdotally, in my little corner of the world, the economy seems to be improving. People I know who have been unemployed, some for a very long time, over the last few weeks have been finding jobs. Walking down the street this past week, I've seen "Now Hiring" signs in the windows of local businesses. There are fresh faces working at businesses I frequent, and even the local mall is expanding.
10. With Friday's disappointing employment numbers from the establishment survey, you'd be forgiven for thinking the economic data is all doom and gloom. However, the household survey told a different story. While the establishment survey measured only 69k new jobs, the more-accurate household survey picked up 422k. Even the establishment survey looks better when you look at the private sector, which is where we want the growth to happen anyway. And while the unemployment rate ticked up from 8.1% to 8.2%, this was because the labor force grew by 642k as the long-term non-employed start looking for work again. That's not a bad thing!
11. Finally, a note on optimism itself. The CultureLab blog at New Scientist interviews Elaine Fox, author of the book Rainy Brain, Sunny Brain. Fox believes that we can retrain our brains to become more optimistic. She also cites research on the benefits of optimism, saying, "The research shows that, as long as they are realists too, people who have an optimistic mindset and feel like they are able to cope when things do go wrong benefit in all sorts of ways. The evidence is also quite strong now that an optimistic mindset is beneficial for our health. People with optimistic mindsets are also more successful in business, and seem to live longer."
Friday, May 25, 2012
Recent Reasons for Optimism Redux
Some more good news from this week:
1) Child mortality rates in Africa are falling rapidly, and the decline appears to be speeding up. Twelve African countries are seeing declines rapid enough to meet the United Nations Millennium Development Goal of cutting child mortality by two-thirds from 1990 to 2015. Child mortality in three countries, Senegal, Rwanda and Kenya, is falling twice as fast as needed to meet the MDG.
2) In Israel, human skin cells from patients suffering from heart failure have been turned into functionally young, beating heart cells which were "equivalent to the stage of his heart cells when he was just born." The cells were successfully grafted onto rat hearts; human tests are still a ways off.
3) A telomerase gene therapy, when applied to adult mice, extended their lifespans by 24%. Telomerase encourages the regrowth of telomeres, the DNA equivalent of the plastic nub at the end of shoelaces. Telomerase has been shown to increase cultured human cell lifespans; the successful tests on mice have taken the treatment to the next step.
4) In non-health news, a British company is building robotic fish that can automatically test the seas for pollution. The latest buzzphrase seems to be "the internet of things," but the Brits are pushing past that to bring nature itself online.
5) MIT has developed a more life-changing technology for some of us: a nanotech coating for the insides of glass and plastic bottles that lets you get all of the ketchup out of the bottle. And it's not just for fun-- they estimate their coating could help save one million tons of food from being thrown out every year.
6) This morning, the SpaceX Dragon capsule successfully berthed with the International Space Station, becoming the first privately-built spaceship to do so. In the images below, which I captured from NASA's live stream, you can see both the Dragon capsule and the CanadArm used to catch it.
7) It's not quite space, but two California men launched a balloon to about 27 km and took the picture below of the recent solar eclipse (ht). As technology and living standards improve, everyday people are now accomplishing feats for hobbies and even school projects that were once the sole domain of governments and well-funded academics.
8) Earth is often thought of as the solar system's watery planet, but Jupiter's moon Europa has 2-3 times more water than we do. On the surface it's all ice, but geothermal heat could mean liquid oceans under the ice dozens of miles deep. That's good news for extraterrestrial life in our solar system.
9) The provincial government of British Columbia decided this week that its mandatory vehicle emissions inspections had been successful. With the objective of cleaner vehicle emissions achieved, the government is now phasing out the program for non-diesel vehicles, which will save drivers $23 per year per vehicle, not to mention the hassle of the inspections themselves. That may not sound like much, but any time a government actually ends a program because it achieved its objective deserves celebration.
10) Finally, not really news per se, but a nice reminder in the form of Canadian graffiti. Photo courtesy of the Expected Optimist's better half on a trip to Tsawassen, BC.
2) In Israel, human skin cells from patients suffering from heart failure have been turned into functionally young, beating heart cells which were "equivalent to the stage of his heart cells when he was just born." The cells were successfully grafted onto rat hearts; human tests are still a ways off.
3) A telomerase gene therapy, when applied to adult mice, extended their lifespans by 24%. Telomerase encourages the regrowth of telomeres, the DNA equivalent of the plastic nub at the end of shoelaces. Telomerase has been shown to increase cultured human cell lifespans; the successful tests on mice have taken the treatment to the next step.
4) In non-health news, a British company is building robotic fish that can automatically test the seas for pollution. The latest buzzphrase seems to be "the internet of things," but the Brits are pushing past that to bring nature itself online.
5) MIT has developed a more life-changing technology for some of us: a nanotech coating for the insides of glass and plastic bottles that lets you get all of the ketchup out of the bottle. And it's not just for fun-- they estimate their coating could help save one million tons of food from being thrown out every year.
6) This morning, the SpaceX Dragon capsule successfully berthed with the International Space Station, becoming the first privately-built spaceship to do so. In the images below, which I captured from NASA's live stream, you can see both the Dragon capsule and the CanadArm used to catch it.
7) It's not quite space, but two California men launched a balloon to about 27 km and took the picture below of the recent solar eclipse (ht). As technology and living standards improve, everyday people are now accomplishing feats for hobbies and even school projects that were once the sole domain of governments and well-funded academics.
8) Earth is often thought of as the solar system's watery planet, but Jupiter's moon Europa has 2-3 times more water than we do. On the surface it's all ice, but geothermal heat could mean liquid oceans under the ice dozens of miles deep. That's good news for extraterrestrial life in our solar system.
9) The provincial government of British Columbia decided this week that its mandatory vehicle emissions inspections had been successful. With the objective of cleaner vehicle emissions achieved, the government is now phasing out the program for non-diesel vehicles, which will save drivers $23 per year per vehicle, not to mention the hassle of the inspections themselves. That may not sound like much, but any time a government actually ends a program because it achieved its objective deserves celebration.
10) Finally, not really news per se, but a nice reminder in the form of Canadian graffiti. Photo courtesy of the Expected Optimist's better half on a trip to Tsawassen, BC.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Recent Reasons for Optimism
A few optimism-inspiring stories from the past week or so:
1) Researchers at UBC have taken the first step towards a universal flu vaccine.
2) Claire Lomas, paralyzed from the chest down, completed a full 26.2-mile marathon with the help of a bionic suit (video here).
3) Cathy Hutchinson, a tetraplegic who cannot move her arms or legs, was able to lift a bottle to her mouth for a drink with a robotic arm controlled through a brain implant (video here).
4) I've heard of wearing your heart on your sleeve, but how about carrying your pancreas in your hand? A new device billed as a "hand-held artificial pancreas" could soon be improving life for diabetics (ht Innovations).
5) Moving away from bionics, Bob Murphy highlights the case for energy optimism, focusing on proved oil reserves that have continued to grow even as we use more oil than ever before.
6) On the same topic, Mark Perry at Carpe Diem shares some data showing global oil production has now surpassed 75 million barrels per day, and after a few years of apparent stagnation, is now higher than ever before.
7) Randal O'Toole, aka The Antiplanner, recently took a ride inside Google's self-driving car, which I've covered before.
8) From The Economist's Free Exchange blog, researchers in India and Bangladesh have found that sometimes what the poor need most is optimism and hope. The belief that they can improve their lives gives them the ability to actually do so. Small interventions that provide hope, such as providing an $8 bus ticket, decreased depression and spurred the poor to take more action on their own.
1) Researchers at UBC have taken the first step towards a universal flu vaccine.
2) Claire Lomas, paralyzed from the chest down, completed a full 26.2-mile marathon with the help of a bionic suit (video here).
3) Cathy Hutchinson, a tetraplegic who cannot move her arms or legs, was able to lift a bottle to her mouth for a drink with a robotic arm controlled through a brain implant (video here).
4) I've heard of wearing your heart on your sleeve, but how about carrying your pancreas in your hand? A new device billed as a "hand-held artificial pancreas" could soon be improving life for diabetics (ht Innovations).
5) Moving away from bionics, Bob Murphy highlights the case for energy optimism, focusing on proved oil reserves that have continued to grow even as we use more oil than ever before.
6) On the same topic, Mark Perry at Carpe Diem shares some data showing global oil production has now surpassed 75 million barrels per day, and after a few years of apparent stagnation, is now higher than ever before.
7) Randal O'Toole, aka The Antiplanner, recently took a ride inside Google's self-driving car, which I've covered before.
8) From The Economist's Free Exchange blog, researchers in India and Bangladesh have found that sometimes what the poor need most is optimism and hope. The belief that they can improve their lives gives them the ability to actually do so. Small interventions that provide hope, such as providing an $8 bus ticket, decreased depression and spurred the poor to take more action on their own.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Mitt Romney on Health Policy
This is the fourth in a series of entries revisiting Mitt
Romney's policies as stated in the debates. The first covered foreign
policy; the second
covered economic policy. The third covered the social issues
of religion, gay marriage, contraception, abortion, and guns. This entry covers health care, including Obamacare, Romneycare, Medicare, Medicaid and other health reform ideas.
Obamacare vs Romneycare:
Romney often highlighted differences between the Massachusetts health care reform commonly called "Romneycare" and the national Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly called "Obamacare." While he supported and throughout the debates continued to defend Romneycare, he opposed Obamacare to the extent that he promised to grant waivers to all 50 states on his first day in office and to press Congress for full repeal. Claimed differences include:
Medicare and Medicaid
As mentioned above, Romney often criticized Obamacare for cutting Medicare. In fact, almost every time Romney mentioned Medicare, it was either to criticize Obamacare for cutting it, or defending Romneycare for not cutting it.
Regarding actual reforms to Medicare, he wants a shift to a premium support model like the Ryan plan. He also favors means testing for Medicare, where the rich would receive lower benefits and everyone else would receive higher benefits. Finally, he would not repeal Medicare Part D.
He would send Medicaid to the states as a block grant and only allow it to grow at either 1-2% per year (in the 8th debate) or inflation-plus-one-percent (in the 10th debate). He never mentioned any other reform to Medicaid, but repeated this block grant plan in several debates.
Other Health Reforms
Individual Mandates: While Romney opposes Obamacare, including its national individual mandate, he often defended the individual mandate itself as a good policy to carry out on the state level. In the 3rd debate, he compared it to states' ability to require children to attend school. He sees individual mandates as ways to provide the uninsured with what he called in the 6th debate "market-based, private" insurance. In the 8th debate, he said about the individual mandate in Massachusetts, "A lot of people were expecting government to pay their way. And we said, you know what? If people have the capacity to care for themselves and pay their own way, they should." Romney disagrees with Obama on what level of government should impose the individual mandate, but he agrees that it's a good policy in the first place.
Health Savings Accounts: In the 5th debate, Romney said health care "isn't working like a market," but rather is "working like a government utility" because consumers are separated from the cost of health care. He advocated health savings accounts to fix this problem, mentioning HSAs in the 5th and 9th debates.
Employer-based Insurance: In the 9th debate, Romney said we should treat individually-purchased insurance the same as employer-purchased insurance in regards to the tax code. He also mentioned this in the 19th debate.
Tort Reform: In the 9th debate, he advocated tort reform as part of the package of reforms he would replace Obamacare with.
Health Issues Covered Elsewhere
Romney's positions on contraception and abortion were covered in the third entry in this series, on social issues. In addition to the section above, Obamacare was also covered in the second entry in the context of regulations and fiscal responsibility.
Obamacare vs Romneycare:
Romney often highlighted differences between the Massachusetts health care reform commonly called "Romneycare" and the national Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, commonly called "Obamacare." While he supported and throughout the debates continued to defend Romneycare, he opposed Obamacare to the extent that he promised to grant waivers to all 50 states on his first day in office and to press Congress for full repeal. Claimed differences include:
- Obamacare raises taxes; Romneycare didn't
- Obamacare takes money from Medicare; Romneycare didn't
- Obamacare is a national program; Romneycare is a state program
- Similarly, Obamacare is unconstitutional for the national government; Romneycare is constitutional because it's at the state level
- Obamacare includes "a panel that ultimately is going to tell people what kind of care they can have," referring to the Independent Payment Advisory Board; Romneycare does not include such a panel
- Obamacare applies to 100% of the citizenry; Romneycare supposedly only addressed the 8-9% who were uninsured (he said 9% in the 5th debate, 8% in the 6th, 7th and 17th debates)
- Obamacare leads to regulations like the contraception mandate; Romneycare had a provision that people did not have to buy coverage for treatments or medical devices which violated their religious beliefs
- Obamacare was 2,700 pages long; Romneycare was 70 pages long
Medicare and Medicaid
As mentioned above, Romney often criticized Obamacare for cutting Medicare. In fact, almost every time Romney mentioned Medicare, it was either to criticize Obamacare for cutting it, or defending Romneycare for not cutting it.
Regarding actual reforms to Medicare, he wants a shift to a premium support model like the Ryan plan. He also favors means testing for Medicare, where the rich would receive lower benefits and everyone else would receive higher benefits. Finally, he would not repeal Medicare Part D.
He would send Medicaid to the states as a block grant and only allow it to grow at either 1-2% per year (in the 8th debate) or inflation-plus-one-percent (in the 10th debate). He never mentioned any other reform to Medicaid, but repeated this block grant plan in several debates.
Other Health Reforms
Individual Mandates: While Romney opposes Obamacare, including its national individual mandate, he often defended the individual mandate itself as a good policy to carry out on the state level. In the 3rd debate, he compared it to states' ability to require children to attend school. He sees individual mandates as ways to provide the uninsured with what he called in the 6th debate "market-based, private" insurance. In the 8th debate, he said about the individual mandate in Massachusetts, "A lot of people were expecting government to pay their way. And we said, you know what? If people have the capacity to care for themselves and pay their own way, they should." Romney disagrees with Obama on what level of government should impose the individual mandate, but he agrees that it's a good policy in the first place.
Health Savings Accounts: In the 5th debate, Romney said health care "isn't working like a market," but rather is "working like a government utility" because consumers are separated from the cost of health care. He advocated health savings accounts to fix this problem, mentioning HSAs in the 5th and 9th debates.
Employer-based Insurance: In the 9th debate, Romney said we should treat individually-purchased insurance the same as employer-purchased insurance in regards to the tax code. He also mentioned this in the 19th debate.
Tort Reform: In the 9th debate, he advocated tort reform as part of the package of reforms he would replace Obamacare with.
Health Issues Covered Elsewhere
Romney's positions on contraception and abortion were covered in the third entry in this series, on social issues. In addition to the section above, Obamacare was also covered in the second entry in the context of regulations and fiscal responsibility.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Lame Walk...
Okay, not "walk" exactly, but even so, this is another example of technology greatly improving the lives of the least fortunate. In this case a man paralyzed five years ago, Yusuf Akturkoglu, has regained a great deal of his mobility through a piece of technology called a "Robotic Mobilization Device."
On a related note, the video below shows Google's self-driving car allowing a blind man, Steve Mahan, to go through the Taco Bell drive thru and pick up his dry cleaning. These are just banal, everyday things for most of us, but that's the point-- for the blind, they're not. Mahan says, "There are some places that you cannot go. There are some things that you really cannot do... This would give me the independence and the flexibility to go the places I both want to go and need to go when I need to do those things."
Now, these videos were produced by the companies, Tek and Google, that make these two technologies. These are basically just two long ads; take them with the same pinch of salt you'd take with any advertisement. Even so, it's hard not to get excited. As technology advances, we are approaching a world where physical disabilities no longer matter.
On a related note, the video below shows Google's self-driving car allowing a blind man, Steve Mahan, to go through the Taco Bell drive thru and pick up his dry cleaning. These are just banal, everyday things for most of us, but that's the point-- for the blind, they're not. Mahan says, "There are some places that you cannot go. There are some things that you really cannot do... This would give me the independence and the flexibility to go the places I both want to go and need to go when I need to do those things."
Now, these videos were produced by the companies, Tek and Google, that make these two technologies. These are basically just two long ads; take them with the same pinch of salt you'd take with any advertisement. Even so, it's hard not to get excited. As technology advances, we are approaching a world where physical disabilities no longer matter.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Optimism Week
This week saw quite a few optimistic stories in the news and the blogosphere, so I thought I'd bring them together in one place here.
Over at The Economist, the Schumpeter blog highlights two new books, Abundance: The Future is Better Than You Think by Peter Diamandis and Steven Kotler and The Creative Destruction of Medicine: How the Digital Revolution Will Create Better Health Care by Eric Topol. According to The Economist, "These books are a godsend for those who suffer from Armageddon fatigue."
For more on Peter Diamandis, see the one-minute video Evidence for Abundance embedded below. For even more, check out his 16-minute TED talk, where he points out the progress we've made over the last hundred years, and makes the case for future abundance in energy, water, communications, health and education.
The Economist (ht PostLibertarian) also ran a story this week with the tag-line "For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere." That tag-line is a bit misleading-- it may be "the first time ever," but the global decline in poverty has been going on since 2005, a point I've raised before.
The optimism hasn't been limited to The Economist, however. New Scientist ran several features this week focusing on optimism in "the deep future." These range from the availability of natural resources to why we won't kill ourselves off. One of them even includes a tag-line guaranteed to tickle my mood affiliation: "The more optimistic we are about the future of our species, the better we can focus on today's challenges." Although some of those stories are slated to drop behind a paywall soon, NS's non-paywalled blogs were also optimistic this week.
It doesn't end there. Charles Kenny at Foreign Policy magazine (ht To Get Rich is Glorious) notes that pretty much all of us here in the West are in the top 1% globally. They say, "America's rich are really, really rich," but "by global standards, America's middle class is also really, really rich."
Finally, David Boaz at Cato@Liberty points to George Vanderbilt, one of the richest men of his time who despite a massive library and music collection, had less access to books and music than today's internet-connected poor. He also mentions JFK's son Patrick, who was born to the most powerful man on Earth yet died in infancy from a condition that would be "routine" to cure today.
If you've seen any optimistic news lately, please let me know about it in the comments!
Over at The Economist, the Schumpeter blog highlights two new books, Abundance: The Future is Better Than You Think by Peter Diamandis and Steven Kotler and The Creative Destruction of Medicine: How the Digital Revolution Will Create Better Health Care by Eric Topol. According to The Economist, "These books are a godsend for those who suffer from Armageddon fatigue."
For more on Peter Diamandis, see the one-minute video Evidence for Abundance embedded below. For even more, check out his 16-minute TED talk, where he points out the progress we've made over the last hundred years, and makes the case for future abundance in energy, water, communications, health and education.
The Economist (ht PostLibertarian) also ran a story this week with the tag-line "For the first time ever, the number of poor people is declining everywhere." That tag-line is a bit misleading-- it may be "the first time ever," but the global decline in poverty has been going on since 2005, a point I've raised before.
The optimism hasn't been limited to The Economist, however. New Scientist ran several features this week focusing on optimism in "the deep future." These range from the availability of natural resources to why we won't kill ourselves off. One of them even includes a tag-line guaranteed to tickle my mood affiliation: "The more optimistic we are about the future of our species, the better we can focus on today's challenges." Although some of those stories are slated to drop behind a paywall soon, NS's non-paywalled blogs were also optimistic this week.
It doesn't end there. Charles Kenny at Foreign Policy magazine (ht To Get Rich is Glorious) notes that pretty much all of us here in the West are in the top 1% globally. They say, "America's rich are really, really rich," but "by global standards, America's middle class is also really, really rich."
Finally, David Boaz at Cato@Liberty points to George Vanderbilt, one of the richest men of his time who despite a massive library and music collection, had less access to books and music than today's internet-connected poor. He also mentions JFK's son Patrick, who was born to the most powerful man on Earth yet died in infancy from a condition that would be "routine" to cure today.
If you've seen any optimistic news lately, please let me know about it in the comments!
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Repeal the Individual Health Insurance Tax
The number of uninsured in the United States is estimated by the Census to be around 47 million people. Many of them are only uninsured because they lost their job, and their health insurance was tied to that job. When someone gets sick, they're more likely to lose their job but are in much greater need of health insurance. It's remarkable that so many Americans take that risk of losing their insurance right when they need it the most. Even so, about 93% of Americans who have private health insurance have that insurance through their employer. Now why would they do that when it's such a risk?
It's actually pretty straightforward. Back in the 50s, the federal government began giving Americans a tax break for purchasing health insurance through their employer. Any income you spend on employer-based health insurance is exempt from the income tax. However, if you want to purchase an insurance plan not provided by your employer, you have to pay the full tax on that income. Depending on your tax bracket, for most people that's a 20-25% penalty fee just for wanting to buy insurance that won't disappear if you lose your job.
The solution? Just extend the tax break. If you spend any portion of your income on health care or health insurance, you are refunded all tax paid on that income.
How much of a difference would that make? For one thing, the tens of millions of people who are uninsured simply because they're between jobs would be able to afford insurance in the interim. That could be as much as one-third to one-half of the uninsured at any given time. It's not a silver bullet solution, but I think it's as close as you can get on an issue this complex. This one tiny change could cover at least a third of the uninsured. I think it's a great place to start.
So what would it cost? The biggest cost would be to the government in lost tax revenue, but even that is not very much. There's about 12 million Americans currently paying this tax. The average annual premium for one-person non-employer insurance is about $3,000, and the average marginal tax rate in the US is about 22%. [Sources: insurance, taxes] That works out to about $8 billion in tax revenue that the government would be giving up with this policy, or $26 per American. That's pocketchange to a government that's running deficits hundreds of times this amount.
So why isn't it being considered? Well, I don't know. Maybe someone reading this can provide a counterargument? It's worth noting that the only play this has gotten in the Democrats' plan has been suggestions to eliminate the tax break entirely, and tax the entire country on their health plans (but that's only to pay for the trillion-plus cost of the rest of the program). That would be much more devastating to the average American, although it would eliminate the incentive for employer-based insurance.
It's actually pretty straightforward. Back in the 50s, the federal government began giving Americans a tax break for purchasing health insurance through their employer. Any income you spend on employer-based health insurance is exempt from the income tax. However, if you want to purchase an insurance plan not provided by your employer, you have to pay the full tax on that income. Depending on your tax bracket, for most people that's a 20-25% penalty fee just for wanting to buy insurance that won't disappear if you lose your job.
The solution? Just extend the tax break. If you spend any portion of your income on health care or health insurance, you are refunded all tax paid on that income.
How much of a difference would that make? For one thing, the tens of millions of people who are uninsured simply because they're between jobs would be able to afford insurance in the interim. That could be as much as one-third to one-half of the uninsured at any given time. It's not a silver bullet solution, but I think it's as close as you can get on an issue this complex. This one tiny change could cover at least a third of the uninsured. I think it's a great place to start.
So what would it cost? The biggest cost would be to the government in lost tax revenue, but even that is not very much. There's about 12 million Americans currently paying this tax. The average annual premium for one-person non-employer insurance is about $3,000, and the average marginal tax rate in the US is about 22%. [Sources: insurance, taxes] That works out to about $8 billion in tax revenue that the government would be giving up with this policy, or $26 per American. That's pocketchange to a government that's running deficits hundreds of times this amount.
So why isn't it being considered? Well, I don't know. Maybe someone reading this can provide a counterargument? It's worth noting that the only play this has gotten in the Democrats' plan has been suggestions to eliminate the tax break entirely, and tax the entire country on their health plans (but that's only to pay for the trillion-plus cost of the rest of the program). That would be much more devastating to the average American, although it would eliminate the incentive for employer-based insurance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
