ckemere

For example, the absolute best diagnosticians in Houston are at the public hospital primarily serving Medicaid and Harris Health patients. Super evidence based, order tests for differential diagnosis not to make $$. Passionate about what they do. In a unexplained emergency my doctor friends would go there to be diagnosed and then the fancy privates to be treated.

I was unimpressed by the situation described. It seems that existing injection wells often have all sorts of negative consequences that are avoided by bankruptcy. I suspect more “no”/“waits” in the past might have been reasonable

But also the accumulation of wealth drives so many negative issues in society that we want to lessen. And extreme wealth seems to make things even worse.

I would have liked some more unpacking of how this disconnect would have been interpreted by Clausewitz.

It also struck me that as an outsider to these conflicts, I assume that the combatants are acting rationally from the perspective of the adage (“No one starts a war—or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so—without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it“) and I judge the morality based on the inferred intent. That would also have been interesting to unpack…

Or a visit to California railroad museum documenting Japanese immigrants building railroads?

Disclaimers- I don’t actually gather data. I don’t explore at night to see who is actually sleeping rough.

I do get report from panhandlers that they need $20 to stay at the shelter…

I think the most charitable interpretation of your argument might be that people would be more inclined to ignore the rules for ideas they believe in, but my data suggests that government employees in general (and not just the military!!) tend to be rule followers. I would argue that most people’s complaints about the government historically could be summed up by this???

I know many folks that don't have any animus to individual people. They just have been brainwashed since early childhood...

The choice of the government to allow a non competitive market is a choice to transfer consumer surplus to producers, which is effectively a tax-by-regulatory choice. So the counter argument to “what about Bell Labs” would be that the democratically elected government (in theory) can more efficiently gather that tax and pay for research.

Recognizing counter arguments about effective allocation of resources to useful research. But also recognizing that much R&D goes to future profits for the company rather than just societal benefit.

Do you have knowledge of, eg of New Hampshire (which is mentioned as a counter example in the article?)

(Though this doesn’t capture top end federal income tax rate.)

Unclear how we recover as a country given the reach of the Fox News propaganda. Maybe a huge recession?