Going global - Photo: Ileana Johnson
|
Keynesian
economists talk about market failures such as public goods and private
goods. Public goods are, in their description, “socially valuable
commodities” which cannot be financed by private enterprise because the prices
would not be “socially desirable.” (read that as very expensive)
It is their
opinion that the “government must pay for public goods.” Examples of public
goods they give include “everything from national defense to coastal
lighthouses.”
Public
goods are identified
as any goods that cannot be depleted by the users or that can exclude
people from using them. Spraying an area for mosquitoes that cause malaria
and other diseases benefits everyone and so does clearing a street of snow.
“If a
country provides a strong military, every citizen receives its protection, even
persons who do not want it.”
Foolishly
rejecting border protection (public good) from illegal and dangerous
intruders at the border, some of whom may harbor illnesses of public concern,
falls under the category of irrational behavior of those who reject such
protection for all but lock their own homes, surround them with fences, and have
guns.
Non-paying
users of public goods cannot be excluded from enjoying such
goods, not to mention that it would be difficult to collect fees for the
benefits public goods provide. That is what Keynesian economists call “free-rider
problem.”
Illegal
aliens, non-paying users of public goods, enjoy our roads, public parks,
frolic disrespectfully in pools designed as memorials to our WWI and WWII
veterans, and send their children to public schools.
Additionally,
they receive Social Security Income even though they’ve never paid into the trust
fund and collect earned income tax credits for their children although they
seldom pay income taxes to the IRS. They do pay sales taxes. They also have free
medical care through Medicaid and Medicare, depending on age, police
protection, fire protection, and can use public libraries.
Would people
pay, let’s say $10,000 a year each, to support national defense? Without government involvement, such a public
good would not be provided, argue Keynesian economists. Would it not? What
about mercenary soldiers?
Another misleading
implication is that the supply of a public good is not depleted
by an additional user and thus the marginal opportunity cost of serving an
additional user is zero. It is certainly true in some instances.
But is that
true if an additional illegal alien child is added to a classroom and he/she
does not speak English, needs translators, specialized teachers, specialized textbooks,
tutoring, religious accommodations, and are carriers of diseases such as
measles, TB, hepatitis, Chagas disease, Honduran flu, just to name a few?
What about
public health providers in counties’ health departments who become overwhelmed
with non-paying customers who take advantage of “free” services? What about ER
rooms in many hospitals, flooded with non-paying illegal alien customers?
Who pays the
bill for these public goods? Does an additional user of free medical
care or welfare programs cost the generous society at large zero? One could
argue that by treating them for free, we prevent further spread of disease and
it is thus a necessary cost to society.
Do illegal
aliens who use state parks and public beaches really cost society nothing for
its use? Ask the people who must clean behind their picnics on the beach or at
the park. And how much damage do they really do to the environment? Does that
bear no additional cost to society?
A private
good is explained by Keynesian economists as depletable and excludable
– depletable as in ‘used up’ when someone consumes it and excludable
when someone who does not pay for it can be kept from enjoying it.
This is
certainly abomination to leftist collectivism where everyone should “share”
everything. (the Latin word “communis”
means “shared, common”). In the reality of collectivism, the communists pay lip
service to “everyone owns everything” but nobody can lay claim to anything, not
even an apple picked off a tree from a large orchard if one is hungry. There
are harsh legal penalties for picking food or for taking anything from the
collectivist farm or factory for one’s personal use.
Keynesian
economists agree that “communities” have devoted a large proportion of
government expenditures and of municipal budgets to finance public goods because
they “generate substantial external benefits,” i.e. national defense, public
health, police and fire protection, and research.
It appears
that the sanctuary state of California is now devoting large expenditures to
providing free medical care and insurance to “low income illegal aliens” (if
they are in our country illegally, how do they know their income is low?) while
American veterans are homeless, cannot find the promised medical care they need
in VA hospitals, or are paying doctors in cash for visits, tests, and procedures
because they cannot afford medical insurance premiums.
Collectivist
economists view private goods with a jaundiced eye as people who cannot
pay for private goods are being kept from enjoying them: a fancy yacht, a
private airplane, membership in a private club, a golf club, or the country
club.
There are “clubs”
which exclude others for economic and non-economic motives. These
“clubs” or “organizations” exclude others for reasons such as:
-
Pettiness
(good ole boys’ and girls’ clubs)
-
Desire
to control an issue(s) and outcome(s)
-
Greed
(controlling seats on the exchange and Wall Street for example)
-
Specialty
guilds for status, perceived skill, nobility, influence, and wealth
-
Vaunted
academia membership and tenure for lefties
-
Economic
exclusion to maintain high demand and earnings (lawyers, doctors, and others by
limiting licensing)
-
Alumni
and big donor clubs to sport teams
-
Influential
church membership exclusions
-
World
stage political exclusion (limiting membership)
-
Award
winner’s member clubs
-
Peace,
literature, art, film, and science prizes reserved almost exclusively for the
political left
The most
vociferous complainers about the existence of private goods and the
dearth of public goods are lefties. Yet the left controls and “owns” the
entire education system, most of the mainstream media, technology, social
media, Wall Street, the justice system, the entertainment industry, most
government departments, and the military industrial complex. Yet they keep whining
in front of microphones and cameras that the downtrodden and illegals are
abused and economically oppressed by capitalism and therefore socialism is a much
better alternative. But none of them are in a hurry to move to Cuba and other
socialist paradis they idolize.
I do not see
any bleeding-heart lefties giving up their private goods to redress
their constant complaints against capitalism.
No comments:
Post a Comment