Differing Views on Healthcare from an Economics Perspective

By: Vitali Berditchevski · September 7, 2009 · Filed Under Health Law, Legal Reform, Politics · Add Comment

I have heard, seen and read the debate among pundits in regard to healthcare reform south of the border. Cutting through the misinformation, spin, rhetoric and outright bull, there is a somewhat trivial economic explanation to the differing opinions. As usual, some of the easiest explanations are the ones most often overlooked.

This economic perspective is a result of one of the comments I saw on the WiseLaw Blog which talked about the comments of Glenn Beck (who was ranting about a “lottery” that is the Canadian healthcare system). The comment went as follows:

“…I know nothing of Beck but suspect he promotes the “conservative” point of view, which, briefly stated, is that being rich should MEAN something….”

This is serious food for thought. What exactly does it mean to be rich? In obvious language, it implies an ability to consume luxury goods and services available in the market. Conversely, what does it mean to be the opposite of rich (I don’t want to say “poor” because that has a different definition)? It means a general inability to consume luxury goods due to having to spend the majority of income on necessities.

You can see where this is going with regards to healthcare. Framed like this, the question is trivial: is healthcare a necessity or a luxury? Your initial answer will depend on your political preference, but consider the following premises and let’s see where logic takes us:

People cannot control when they become ill; and
Spending on luxury goods and services is first to get cut in an economic downturn due to less money being available and thus a greater proportion of income being spent on “necessities”.

What is the logical conclusion if we assume that healthcare is a luxury? If a “rich” person becomes ill during a recession when there is less money to spend on luxuries, money would not be spent on treatment.

Politics notwithstanding, I hope my readers can see why this conclusion is silly. Treatment for an illness cannot wait for an economic upswing nor should people’s health be affected by where we stand in the business cycle.

I can therefore conclude that healthcare is not a luxury, but a necessity. This also means that the anonymous reader of WiseLaw is only partially correct: for “conservatives” being “rich” should mean something, but any conservative with an understanding of economics will understand that being the opposite of rich should not spell lack access to healthcare.

*Note*: I am well aware that I used some “economics” terms without proper “economics” definitions. I did this because I didn’t want eyes to glaze over.

Cross-posted at Lawyerling.ca

Post tags: economics, healthcare reform, us

Taxes are inevitable

By: Law is Cool · August 21, 2009 · Filed Under Privacy · Add Comment

Swiss bank UBS to name names

Swiss banking giant UBS AG (UBS-N15.51-0.39-2.45%) agreed Wednesday to turn over to the IRS the details of 4,450 accounts suspected of holding undeclared assets by American customers, piercing Switzerland’s long-standing tradition of banking secrecy.

Post tags: banking secrecy, Doug Shulman, IRS, Switzerland, tax evasion, Tax Law, taxes, UBS, us

Death by procedure

By: Law is Cool · August 20, 2009 · Filed Under Civil Rights, Criminal Law · Add Comment

US judge ‘ignored death row plea’

The prisoner, Michael Wayne Richard, was put to death hours after she allegedly shut the court, despite being told an appeal was imminent.

Post tags: court, death sentence, execution, Michael Wayne Richard, professional misconduct, Sharon Keller, Texas, us

Another Canadian in trouble for online gambling business

By: Law is Cool · August 11, 2009 · Filed Under Criminal Law, International Law · Add Comment

Canadian indicted in U.S. on online gambling charges

Yusill Scribner, a spokeswoman for the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, declined to comment when asked about the prospect of extraditing him. Canada will extradite its citizens only if the laws under which they are charged are similar to Canadian laws.

“It raises the issue whether one country can apply its law to citizens of another country,” said Javad Heydary, a Toronto lawyer with experience in gaming law.

“We do not have anything close to the U.S. legislation,” he said, alluding to the U.S. Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act.

Post tags: Douglas Rennick, extradition, gaming law, online gambling, us

B&E or Homicide? Choose Quick!

By: Law is Cool · May 21, 2009 · Filed Under Criminal Law, International Law · Add Comment

If you had to choose between being killed, or having your house robbed while you were out or asleep, which would you choose?

Earlier today the Texas Senate passed a bill that would allow concealed handguns on campus, presumably including law schools.

According to Statistics Canada (2001), the homicide rate in Canada is 1.8 per hundred thousand. In the U.S. it’s more than three times that, at 5.5 per hundred thousand. Aggravated assault? 143 in Canada, and 324 in the U.S.

NRA supporters always claims that guns help keep America safe. And they might have a point.

Breaking and entering rates in the U.S. are lower than in Canada, at 521 per hundred thousand to 954. And motor vehicle thefts are 414 compared to 728 per hundred thousand.

But it’s just as plausible that more crimes in the U.S. are commissioned armed than not as compared to Canada. And it’s not just an American problem.

Over half the handguns discovered related to crimes in Canada were smuggled from the U.S. It’s a little better than Japan, where 30% of their illegal handguns come from the States. But then they have this big ocean separating them too.

Maybe we can feel some comfort in knowing that a full 80% of crime scene guns in Mexico were also smuggled from the U.S. And that Texas is as far from the Canadian border as possible.

Maybe.