If I pick my own pocket, I have change in my hand.

From a KGUN 9 (Tucson) report on a health care "town hall" meeting put on by Rep. Gabrielle Giffords:

Rebecca Wilson is a physical therapist. She thinks if we help doctors cover the cost of medical school they won't have to charge such high fees.

"The ones that do go into these kinds of professions that are coming out of school with 100 thousand dollars of debt or more they have to be motivated by money."

They don't require much economics training or analytic thinking in general to be a physical therapist, do they? "Motivated by money" is usually a good thing; we want more people supplying high-priced services, as it makes them cheaper. (Ponder that for a few days, Ms Wilson!)

Moreover, since when was the price of health care--or health insurance, which isn't the same thing--high because med school is expensive? But even if this were the case, it doesn't become cheaper to subsidize medical doctors' tuition fees with taxes, which is presumably what is meant here by "we help". To first approximation, the price of medical services would be offset by the amount of the subsidy. There would be a redistribution from patients to non-patients, a sort of forced insurance-like spreading, but not weighted by risk, which is what these people are calling for anyway, but there'd be no reduction of total cost. When one considers that the med schools will be able to charge more, because more physicians will be able to afford a higher tuition fee once there is a subsidy, it's evident that such a scheme would drive costs up.

Magical thinking abounds. Some people think we can become wealthier by picking our own pockets.

Capone and Daschle

When they finally got Capone, it had to do with tax evasion. While I don't think that disqualifies someone from serving in Cabinet, I'm happy to see Daschle go. A "Federal Health Board" isn't a fix, it's hoke.

Why left-wing reactionaries:

One of the benefits of keeping a messy apartment is stumbling on reading material while cleaning up. From "The Tide in The Affairs of Men", Milton and Rose Friedman, Notes from FEE, December 2006:

...Success made residual evils stand out all the more sharply, both encouraging reformers to press for governmental solutions and making the public more sympathetic to their appeals.

Friedman was writing about the "Progressive" tide in the early 20th Century, but this could very well be a partial explanation of why medical treatments that would have been tantamount to magic in our great-grandparents' day are now considered "rights" by many who haven't thought things through.

Robert Mugabe, the great teacher.

Can anyone really be this stupid?

President Robert Mugabe's order that all shop prices be cut by at least half, and sometimes several times more, has forced stores to open to hordes of customers waving thick blocks of near worthless money given new value by the price cuts. The police and groups of ruling party supporters could be seen leading the charge for a bargain.

If I had to write humor about banana republics, I'm not sure if I could make such price controls up! It almost leads one to think that Mugabe is but an insane performance artist, devoting his ouvre to the illustration of what could be learned at community college remedial Economics 99. Perhaps I should thank him for providing yet another illustration of what happens when price controls are instituted in any market.

Or not.

Economists say the price cuts will only deepen the national crisis, leaving many shops bare because they will not be able to afford to restock while official retail prices remain lower than the cost of buying wholesale or importing. Mr Mugabe has dismissed such warnings as "bookish economics".

Isn't the journalistic practice of writing "Scientists say" or "economists say", as though scientific opinion and superstition or the whims of madmen are equally valid, amusing in a sick way? Editors really should check for "false balance".

But more to the point: Is Michael Moore the American Robert Mugabe? It would seem as though the man doesn't consult economists, even before making a film that proposes a healthcare policy solution.

Perhaps he believes they're being funded by the drug companies in the same conspiracy which led CNN to dare tell him he's wrong.

A new drinking game: take a big, big swig if you hear Moore use the term "bookish economics." And send me the video clip!

UPDATE: Moore has come pretty close in the past, feeling it desirable to "educate" George Mason law students about the sinister underpinnings of their studies.

This law and economics nonsense is nothing more than an attempt on the part of the corporate state to extend its reach into the legal field; and I think the graduating students should know they are little more than pawns in Corporate America's plan to erode the American way of life