In a recent article, Megan McArdle considers why insuring her dog is much cheaper than insuring a person. McArdle sees two reasons. Many of today’s highly advanced, expensive medical treatments are not available in veterinary medicine.
By forcing refiners to use more ethanol than they think is safe for the majority of intended uses, the government is forcing refiners to choose between creating a product that they fear will harm consumers and facing the legal consequences of not following the mandate.
Obamacare requires young people to pay higher health insurance premiums in order to subsidize older people’s coverage. But don’t worry, say Obamacare’s defenders: Many young people will qualify for federal subsidies to offset the higher premiums.
In a recent op-ed Judith Stein of the Center for Medicare Advocacy explains why she thinks government should lower drug prices for Medicare recipients. The article is worth reading because it is an example of a pernicious assumption that permeates most health policy discussions.
In my recent interview with Sally Pipes about Canadian health care, we discussed how Canada succumbed to socialized medicine. According to Ms. Pipes, calls for government-provided health care began in the province of Saskatchewan in the 1940s.
Fortune magazine has come out with its list of the World’s Most Admired Companies, virtually all of them household names. Would you like to guess how many of the top 10 most admired companies have, within the past two or three years, been subjected to antitrust enforcement?
I do not think a business leader should ever ask the federal government to raise the minimum wage. An executive like Jelinek is completely free to pay all of his employees above the current minimum wage — and he does. Jelinek argues that this is good for his business. It might be. Regardless, shouldn’t this be something that every business leader is free to decide for himself?
Washington Post writer Steven Pearlstein recently published a thoughtful piece on the morality of capitalism that has gotten a lot of attention. I have a lot to say about it, and I want to start with one of the more intriguing questions raised by Pearlstein.
By asking why low-wage workers are not making more money, Senator Warren is insinuating that these dramatic productivity gains were largely caused by the workers themselves. But what about the small minority of innovators who invented new technologies and processes that vastly improved worker productivity?
