Interesting People mailing list archives
more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 08:24:35 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Scott Alexander <salex () dsl cis upenn edu> Date: September 7, 2005 11:55:36 PM EDT To: dave () farber net Subject: Re: [IP] more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 16:40 -0400, David Farber wrote:
Begin forwarded message: From: Russell Nelson <nelson () crynwr com> Date: September 7, 2005 4:24:54 PM EDT To: dave () farber net Cc: jean_camp <jean_camp () harvard edu> Subject: Re: [IP] more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader
You're in good company, Jean: almost nobody understands the American system of government. It's truly scary. We don't have one government. We have 50 separate governments, and one federal government to help them interoperate. Unfortunately, this understanding has been totally lost, so everyone seeks to solve every problem at the federal level.
Of course, the New Deal undermined this approach. I pay more in taxes to the federal government than to my state and local governments combined even given that I live in NJ, decidedly not a low tax state. If we assume that it is not reasonable for people to pay more taxes, we have to assume that the federal government is going to provide more than an oversight role. Of course, whoever is out of power at the federal level screams about how states rights are being undermined until they get into power.... [...]
I'm a libertarian. I'm not against big government. I'm against *monopoly* big government. It may very well be that health care is best paid for by government. How will we ever know unless we try it? Should we run one big experiment on the entire country? No! We should allow some state to establish universal health care with a residency requirement. If that state does well, then other states will see that and adopt their program.
This approach works well on unsettled questions. However, I don't believe there is a deep question about rescuing people off their roofs when there is a flood. (There are excellent questions to be asked about how they came to find themselves in that situation, but pretty consistently, Americans have been willing to risk more people than will be rescued to rescue those in crisis.) Certainly by the time there is consensus on such an issue, redundancy should be considered. Should Mobile, New Orleans, Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Tampa, Clearwater, Pensacola and every other municipality in the path of hurricanes maintain a separate infrastructure for rescuing people from rooftops? How about low lying areas of NJ where we see a hurricane that produces significant flooding every 20-50 years? Even if we push this up to the state level, there is a significant amount of equipment that will need to be maintained and have personnel available to use it even though most of it will likely be unused for this purpose for years at a time. However, by going to the federal level, particularly to the extent that the equipment can be dual-use (military or rescue; park service or rescue; heck I wouldn't mind if some of those helicopters buzzing around with politicians dropped them off in the center of the catastrophe and then evacuated some locals instead), we reduce costs. Best, Scott Alexander ------------------------------------- You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Current thread:
- more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader David Farber (Sep 05)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader David Farber (Sep 07)
- more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader David Farber (Sep 07)
- more on NYT op-ed: Waiting for a Leader David Farber (Sep 08)