<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: economist</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'economist'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22economist%22&t=%22economist%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:11:54 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Measuring GNH (“Gross National Happiness”)</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4294636&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Fmeasuring-gnh-gross-national-happiness%2F2010.12.26</link>
            <description>This evening, when I fin­ished clean­ing up the kitchen after our fam­ily din­ner, I glanced at the cur­rent issue of the Econ­o­mist. The cover fea­tures this head­line: the Joy of Grow­ing Old (or why life begins at 46). It’s a light read, as this so-influential mag­a­zine goes, but nice to con­tem­plate if you’re, say, 50 years old and won­der­ing about the future.
The article’s the­sis is this: Although as peo­ple move towards old age they lose things they treasure &amp;#8212; vitality, men­tal sharp­ness and looks &amp;#8212; they also gain what peo­ple spend their lives pur­su­ing: Happiness.
Fig. 1 (above): “A snap­shot of the age dis­tri­b­u­tion of psy­cho­log­i­cal well-being in the United States,” Stone, et al: PNAS, May 2010 (y-axis: &amp;#8220;WB&amp;...</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4294636</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 26 Dec 2010 19:00:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4294636</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Economist, Information Privacy, Microsoft, and Technological Determinism:  An Online Debate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4219701&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=34765&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fhcrenewal.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F12%2Feconomist-information-privacy-microsoft.html</link>
            <description>At The Economist, an online &quot;debate&quot; entitled Health 2.0 has been posted (link). It poses a debate between two experts.In this case, the debate is between Peter Neupert, Corporate vice-president, Microsoft Health Solutions Group, vs. Deborah Peel, MD, Founder, Patient Privacy Rights and leader of the Coalition for Patient Privacy.The readers are asked to vote upon whether they agree or disagree with this statement:This house believes that any loss of privacy from digitising health care will be more than compensated for by the welfare gains from increased efficiency.Note the phrase &quot;will be.&quot;Readers are also permitted to post comments.My response was as follows:30/11/2010 19:16:26 pmDear Sir, The premise of this entire debate is logically fallacious, in fact begging the question. This state...</description>
            <author>Health Care Renewal</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4219701</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 15:30:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4219701</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Enough Community College PDA</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4036622&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FtH6P4GPzYM0%2F</link>
            <description>By Neal McCluskeyYesterday, President Obama hosted the White House Summit on Community Colleges, and in-your-face love was in the air. President Obama and Second Lady Jill Biden, a community college professor, couldn&amp;#8217;t keep their hands off their signficant other, lavishing all sorts of praise on their favorite little schools.
Swooned Dr. Biden about the dreamy things community colleges do for their students:
They are students like the mother who shared her experience with us on the White House website of working towards a degree while raising three children and straddling financial challenges.  Now employed and the holder of a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree, she wrote, “Community colleges didn’t just change my life, they gave me my life.”
Community colleges do that e...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4036622</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 20:57:54 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4036622</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Competing Naïvetés: How to Produce a Privacy-Protective Society</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3933081&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FXaxNwzAs0AY%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperMy Economist.com debate on whether governments should &amp;#8220;do far more to protect online privacy&amp;#8221; has now concluded. The vote on the motion went to my opponent, supporting government involvement by a margin of 52 to 48 percent.
I won a moral victory, perhaps, moving the vote from 70 percent in favor of government intervention to the very close ending tally. My commentary highlighting the substantial role of government in undermining privacy seems to have begun moving the dial in my direction.
A pleasant side-effect of the debate was to open lines of communication with a number of my privacy-advocate colleagues, many of whom do not share my libertarian outlook. One called me naïve to think consumers can successfully demand privacy given the imposing wall of corporate p...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3933081</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 13:53:44 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3933081</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Economist Debate: ‘Governments Must Do Far More to Protect Online Privacy’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3914973&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fx5hbHxryjuY%2F</link>
            <description>By Jim HarperI&amp;#8217;m at the mid-point of an online debate hosted by the Economist.com on the proposition: &amp;#8220;This house believes that governments must do far more to protect online privacy.&amp;#8221;
I&amp;#8217;m on the &amp;#8220;No&amp;#8221; side. In my opening statement, I tried to give some definition to the many problems referred to as &amp;#8220;privacy,&amp;#8221; and I argued for personal responsibility on the part of Internet users. I even gave out instructions for controlling cookies, by which people can deny ad networks their most common source of consumer demographic information if they wish. Concluding, I said: 
Government &amp;#8220;experts&amp;#8221; should not dictate social rules. Rather, interactions among members of the internet community should determine the internet&amp;#8217;s social and busine...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3914973</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 18:59:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3914973</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Prominent Economists Debate Trade Deficits</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3880832&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FAm5h5LMNov0%2F</link>
            <description>Following Dan&amp;#8217;s and David&amp;#8217;s recent posts on the trade deficit and its (ir)relevance, allow me to draw readers&amp;#8217; attention to the Economist&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8220;By Invitation&amp;#8221; blog, where invited prominent economists debate topical economic issues.
One of their current questions is: Should governments take any steps to boost exports? That&amp;#8217;s an important topic, and an especially timely one given the Obama administration&amp;#8217;s &amp;#8216;National Export Initiative,&amp;#8217; a five-year plan to double U.S. exports. All of us here at Cato&amp;#8217;s trade center have previously expressed skepticism about the feasiblity and/or wisdom of that plan, and Dan Ikenson blogged earlier today about the administration&amp;#8217;s apparent incoherence in pursuit of that goal. 
The Economis...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3880832</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 20:21:01 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3880832</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should Govt Regulate Executive Pay?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3880846&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fr_oIT7VSI8Q%2F</link>
            <description>Every couple of weeks, the Economist conducts an on-line debate between two economists over a timely public policy issue.  This week&amp;#8217;s debate features yours truly, debating Professor Wayne Guay of the Wharton School.  The question being debated:  should government regulate the pay of corporate executives?
You probably won&amp;#8217;t be surprised to learn I take the position that government should generally stay out of regulating executive pay (or any pay).  To see my argument, just follow the link. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3880846</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:24:11 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3880846</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>A Spending Quiz from the ‘Rebel Economist’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3865247&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FLoxA6OeHX-c%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel J. MitchellA former Heritage Foundation colleague has returned to youtube.com with a video asking taxpayers whether examples of government waste are true or false. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3865247</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 21:59:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3865247</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cato Fellow Defends Your Right to Gamble</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3772222&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F4ayRoes9hV8%2F</link>
            <description>By Sallie JamesMy friend and Cato media fellow Radley Balko is currently participating in an online debate on the Economist website, the motion being that &amp;#8220;This house believes there should be no legal restrictions on gambling.&amp;#8221;  Radley is, of course, defending the motion. The first round of arguments is up and voting (and commenting) is open.
Radley was leading by a landslide this morning, but there has been a curious development. Reports Radley:
Interesting. Support from my side went from 85% to 46% in a little over three hours, during which no new arguments were posted. Wondering if a Baptist convention just let out.
The debaters will close their arguments on Wednesday, with the winner announced Friday. Please show your support for civil liberties and for Radley by voting....</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3772222</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 18:21:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3772222</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Economist: “Efforts to Challenge Obamacare Are Gaining Momentum”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3599361&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdoT4DqN5o7s%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonFrom a recent news item in The Economist:
[M]illions of Americans&amp;#8230;think that Barack Obama’s health-insurance laws must be overturned&amp;#8230;[P]olls suggest that many Americans still dislike them&amp;#8230;
At the federal level Republican leaders in Congress have jumped on every bit of negative news—for example, a recent report from the Congressional Budget Office suggesting that the reforms will cost more than originally forecast—as just cause for overturning them&amp;#8230;
The real action is outside Washington, though. Virginia, Utah and Idaho have outlawed the new individual mandate, which will require everyone to purchase health cover, and other states are looking at similar measures. Elsewhere, opponents have taken to the ballot box. Missouri will hold a referen...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3599361</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 16:21:13 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3599361</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>What Do The Economist’s Bloggers Think a Free Market Is, Anyway?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3542577&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FsszwWtaGPKk%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonA correspondent for The Economist, whose initials are M.S., posts this on the Democracy in America blog:
[T]he new health-care-reform law passed in March is an entirely private-insurer, free-market-based reform. If someone were to refer to it as a &amp;#8220;government takeover of the health-care sector&amp;#8221;, that person would hold a factually incorrect ideological belief.
I wonder what convinced M.S. that the new health care law is an entirely free-market-based reform.  Was it the expansion of the government&amp;#8217;s Medicaid program to another 16 million Americans?  Was it the 19-million-plus other Americans who will receive government subsidies to purchase private health insurance? Was it the new price controls that the law imposes on health insurance?  Or the price ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3542577</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 May 2010 01:06:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3542577</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Should We Break Up the Banks?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3538076&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F5P7uroEV4wg%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaWhen it comes to banking policy, there are few people I respect more than Jonathan Macey and Arnold Kling; so when these two, independently, argue that we should be breaking up the largest banks, it is idea that merits consideration.  Yet I still have my doubts.
First, lets start with what we are fairly certain of.  There is a large empirical literature that suggest most US mega-banks are beyond their efficient size.  There is a good survey of the literature by former Fed Economist Allen Berger .  So, at a minimum, the academic literature suggests the largest banks are beyond a size that is justified by the social benefits.
However, there is also a small literature that suggests more concentrated banking systems are more stable, and less prone to crisis.  Some of t...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3538076</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 18:30:52 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3538076</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama to Increase FHA Risk</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3424836&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FqLrVGKVqc9Y%2F</link>
            <description>By Tad DeHavenThe Federal Housing Administration is heading toward a taxpayer bailout, yet the president’s latest mortgage modification plan would further increase the agency’s exposure to risky mortgages. Mark Calabria calls it a “Backdoor Bank Bailout.”
The administration’s plan would encourage borrowers who owe more than their house is worth to refinance into FHA-insured mortgages. Therefore, the risk of a future foreclosure on these mortgages would fall to the government and taxpayers instead of private lenders.
A recent study from economists at New York University found that the FHA is underestimating its risk exposure. One of the problems is that the FHA isn’t properly accounting for the risk to underwater FHA mortgages that have been refinanced into new FHA mortgages. So...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3424836</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 18:00:51 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3424836</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3403867&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3rgqfOGlbdM%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Idea of the day: Repeal the 16th Amendment, which  gives Congress the power to lay and collect taxes. Replace it with an amendment that requires each state to remit to the federal government a certain percent of its tax revenue.


Economist Richard Rahn on the necessity of failure in the market: &amp;#8220;When government becomes a player and tries to prevent the failure of market participants, its decisions are almost invariably corrupted by the political process.&amp;#8221;


Read up on Goodwin Liu, Obama&amp;#8217;s nominee for a seat on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: &amp;#8220;Liu’s confirmation would compromise the judiciary’s check on legislative overreach and push the courts not only to ratify such constitutional abominations as the individual health insurance mandate but to...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3403867</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:16:18 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3403867</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>AP: Obama Misleads Voters about ObamaCare’s Effects on Premiums</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3374106&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUA3h7xM7mE4%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonThe Associated Press reports:
Buyers, beware: President Barack Obama says his health care overhaul will lower premiums by double digits, but check the fine print&amp;#8230;
The [Congressional Budget Office] concluded that premiums for people buying their own coverage would go up by an average of 10 percent to 13 percent, compared with the levels they&amp;#8217;d reach without the legislation&amp;#8230;
&amp;#8220;People are likely to not buy the same low-value policies they are buying now,&amp;#8221; said health economist Len Nichols of George Mason University. &amp;#8220;If they did buy the same value plans &amp;#8230; the premium would be lower than it is now. This makes the White House statement true. But is it possibly misleading for some people? Sure.&amp;#8221;
Nichols&amp;#8217; comments are also m...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3374106</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:51:05 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3374106</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Monday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3294567&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJHLF_KdSQt0%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
Progressives are outraged that the Supreme Court overturned limits on corporate political advertising last month. Here&amp;#8217;s why they should be rejoicing.


Policy forum today at Cato: &amp;#8220;Will the Senate Health Care Bill Keep the Poor Poor?&amp;#8221; Click here to watch live from 12:00-1:30 PM EST.


Idea of the day: Cut the Commerce Department to boost real business.


Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron: &amp;#8220;Economists find weak or contradictory evidence that higher government spending spurs the economy. Substantial research, however, does find that tax cuts stimulate the economy and that fiscal adjustments—attempts to reduce deficits by raising taxes or lowering expenditure—work better when they focus on tax cuts.&amp;#8221;


Cato&amp;#8217;s Ilya Shapiro wrapping up daily...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3294567</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 17:19:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3294567</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Vote Now: Is Obama Failing?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3262596&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDuS-dbbP72U%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazClosing statements are posted at the Economist debate, &amp;#8220;This house believes that Barack Obama is failing.&amp;#8221; Currently, Obama leads in the voting by a bit less than the margin by which American voters oppose his health care plan. But there&amp;#8217;s still time for a rally! So vote now.
I conclude my closing statement this way:
Has Mr Obama failed? Of course it&amp;#8217;s too early to say that. But is he headed that way? Let&amp;#8217;s go to the tape: His policies are bad for the country; they expand government, reduce freedom and slow the economic recovery. The policies that he cannot implement by executive order have become bogged down in Congress as public opposition mounts. Since he was elected, his party has lost three elections for governor and senator. Public opinion h...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3262596</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:01:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3262596</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is Obama Failing? The Rebuttals</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3243770&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FJtq5yp4ML48%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazAt the Economist&amp;#8217;s online debate, Elaine Kamarck and I have posted rebuttals to the opening statements. I say, among other things:
One question here is how do you measure a politician&amp;#8217;s failure. Is it, for instance, a failure to get his policies enacted, or his success in enacting bad policies? Surveys of historians always give high marks to presidents who expanded government or fought wars. Washington&amp;#8217;s most-quoted political scientist, Norman Ornstein, recently defended the productivity of the current Congress; his article illustrated that to the Washington establishment the very definition of a productive Congress is the spending of more taxpayers&amp;#8217; money, the creation of new agencies and bureaucracies, and the concentration of more power in the hands...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3243770</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:03:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3243770</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Wednesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3239556&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FE6jX2NqYGS8%2F</link>
            <description>By Chris Moody
David Boaz debates at The Economist: Is Obama failing? &amp;#8220;In many ways, Obama has just doubled down on George W. Bush&amp;#8217;s policies of bailouts, takeovers, expanded Fed powers and nationalizations. In a recession he is adding debt, taxes and regulation to the burdens already felt by business.&amp;#8221; Readers can vote and join the debate.


Ever wonder why weather forecasters can get things so wrong?


Looking for a primer on the causes of the financial crisis? The new Cato Policy Report has answers.


How to tell when the government health care overhaul is dead. 


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Citizens United and SpeechNow.org&amp;#8221; featuring Steve Simpson of the Institute of Justice. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3239556</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:40:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3239556</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Debate: Is Obama Failing?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3235831&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FyvhYgkkOBi0%2F</link>
            <description>By David BoazAt the Economist website, I&amp;#8217;m debating the question, &amp;#8220;This house believes that Barack Obama is failing.&amp;#8221; I&amp;#8217;m taking the affirmative. Readers are allowed to vote, and the Economist&amp;#8217;s typically left-leaning readers are voting for Obama by about the same margin that Americans are rejecting his health care plan. So feel free to mosey on over there, read both sides of the argument, and cast your vote. My bottom line:
When your policies aren&amp;#8217;t working, the voters have noticed and your transformative ideological agenda is moving broad public opinion in the other direction, it&amp;#8217;s safe to say you&amp;#8217;re failing.
Rebuttals and closing statements will follow in a few days. But don&amp;#8217;t delay! Visit today! (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3235831</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:18:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3235831</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>State of the Union Fact Check</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3220515&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FdC1O9e04uXY%2F</link>
            <description>By Cato EditorsCato experts put some of President Obama’s core State of the Union claims to the test. Here’s what they found.
THE STIMULUS
Obama’s claim:
The plan that has made all of this possible, from the tax cuts to the jobs, is the Recovery Act. That&amp;#8217;s right &amp;#8212; the Recovery Act, also known as the Stimulus Bill. Economists on the left and the right say that this bill has helped saved jobs and avert disaster.
Back in reality: At the outset of the economic downturn, Cato ran an ad in the nation’s largest newspapers in which more than 300 economists (Nobel laureates among them) signed a statement saying a massive government spending package was among the worst available options. Since then, Cato economists have published dozens of op-eds in major news outlets poking hol...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3220515</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 17:54:17 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3220515</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama’s Other Massachusetts Problem</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3182169&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FleTUXXseucI%2F</link>
            <description>By Michael F. CannonEven if Democrat Martha Coakley wins 50 percent of the vote in the race to fill the late Sen. Ted Kennedy&amp;#8217;s (ahem) term, there are other numbers emanating from Massachusetts that present a problem for President Obama&amp;#8217;s health plan.
On Wednesday, the Cato Institute will release “The Massachusetts Health Plan: Much Pain, Little Gain,” authored by Cato adjunct scholar Aaron Yelowitz and yours truly. Our study evaluates Massachusetts&amp;#8217; 2006 health law, which bears a &amp;#8220;remarkable resemblance&amp;#8221; to the president&amp;#8217;s plan. We use the same methodology as previous work by the Urban Institute, but ours is the first study to evaluate the effects of the Massachusetts law using Current Population Survey data for 2008 (i.e., from the 2009 March suppl...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3182169</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:12:07 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3182169</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mainstream Media’s Trade Gap</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3149038&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fi4laDEwh48A%2F</link>
            <description>By Daniel IkensonIn a post at the Enterprise Blog two days ago, economist Mark Perry deftly parodies a typical mainstream media account of trade protectionism by editing the story in redline to contrast its original presentation with its true significance. I recommend reading the whole thing, but here’s the first paragraph:
WASHINGTON POST (Reuters) &amp;#8211; A U.S. trade panel gave final approval on Wednesday to duties taxes ranging from 10 to 16 percent on cost-conscious firms in the U.S. who purchase low-priced Chinese-made steel pipe rather than high-price domestic pipe, in the biggest U.S. trade case to date against China American companies (and their shareholders, employees, and customers) who shop globally for their inputs and find the best value in China.
Perry’s point—and I s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3149038</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:40:45 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3149038</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Does CRA Undermine Bank Safety?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3075479&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmhO10FsBKMQ%2F</link>
            <description>By Mark A. CalabriaA recent policy forum here at Cato discussed the role of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) in the financial crisis.  While the forum focused on the federal push for ever expanding homeownership to marginal borrowers, the analysis did not touch directly upon the question of whether CRA lending undermines bank safety.
Fortunately this is a question that one economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas bothered to ask.  While his research findings were available before the crisis, they were clearly ignored.
In a peer-reviewed published article, appearing in the journal Economic Inquiry, economist Jeff Gunther concludes that there is &amp;#8220;evidence to suggest that a greater focus on lending in low-income neighborhoods helps CRA ratings but comes at the expense of s...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3075479</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:53:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3075479</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Palmer and Cowen on Libertarianism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3052120&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FY5BCCLS_L6E%2F</link>
            <description>On Tuesday I hosted a Book Forum for Tom Palmer&amp;#8217;s new book, Realizing Freedom: Libertarian Theory, History, and Practice. You can see the video here. I thought Tyler Cowen&amp;#8217;s comments were very astute, so I reproduce an abridged version here:
The first question is, “What do I, as a reader, see as the essential unity or unities in the book?” And I see really two. The first is I see this as a construction and articulation of a vision of what I call reasonable libertarianism. I think we’re in a world right now that is growing very partisan and very rabid, and a lot of things which are called libertarian in the Libertarian Party, or what you might call the Lew Rockwell / Ron Paul camp, are to my eye not exactly where libertarianism should be, and I think Tom has been a very br...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3052120</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:48:59 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3052120</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Vikings and Pirates and Taxes, Oh My!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2984779&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUPeuK9WidMo%2F</link>
            <description>Today&amp;#8217;s episode of &amp;#8220;Hagar the Horrible&amp;#8221; could be an epigraph for the new Fall 2009 issue of Cato Journal.

This issue includes Greek economists Michael Mitsopoulos and Theodore Pelagidis on &amp;#8220;Vikings in Greece: Kleptocratic Interest Groups in a Closed, Rent-Seeking Economy&amp;#8221; as well as Peter Leeson, author of The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates, writing (with David Skarbek) on the effects of foreign aid. As for taxes, well, editor Jim Dorn has assembled a number of useful papers:

Andrew T. Young on taxing, spending, and &amp;#8220;fiscal illusion&amp;#8221;
Michael J. New on the &amp;#8220;starve the beast&amp;#8221; hypothesis
Alan Reynolds on Paul Krugman&amp;#8217;s misunderstanding of the monetary and fiscal lessons of the Great Depression and Japan&amp;#8217;s l...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2984779</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:44:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2984779</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>‘Letting the Sick Die on the Street’</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2954493&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F3_H-jg5GycA%2F</link>
            <description>Blogger Matt Yglesias has described my CNN op-ed on health care as follows:
Meanwhile, in Harvard economist and Cato Institute senior fellow Jeffrey Miron’s dystopia, if your parents wind up with no money through bad luck or poor decision-making and then you get sick you’ll just die on the street for lack of money.
Did I really say such an outrageous thing? Well, I did not use exactly those words (as Matt makes clear), but yes, that is the logical implication of my position.
And I stand by it. Here&amp;#8217;s why.
First, my assessment is that even with no government health insurance, hardly anyone would die on the street for lack of health care. The poor would use their income transfers to buy some health care or insurance. The poor would receive private charity. And health care would be ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2954493</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:33:24 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2954493</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>To Make Health Care Affordable, Don’t Add Regulations — Repeal Them</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2920159&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FSluhLULSoik%2F</link>
            <description>David Freddoso of the Washington Examiner reveals how the monopolies that states enjoy over licensing doctors, nurses, and other clinicians reduce access to care for low-income Americans:
Stan Brock just wants to help. The former co-star of &amp;#8220;Wild Kingdom&amp;#8221; wants to deliver free medical, dental and vision care to the poor. Whereas most politicians talk about &amp;#8220;bending the cost curve&amp;#8221; in health care, Brock simply wants to break it &amp;#8211; to provide care free of charge, at the hands of unpaid volunteer doctors and dentists using donated equipment.
Brock&amp;#8217;s group, Remote Area Medical, wants to bring its services to Washington, and soon. He wants his volunteer eye doctors to grind new glasses on the spot for those having trouble seeing.
He wants his dentists to pull ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2920159</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:57:53 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2920159</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>ACORN and Health Care</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2904857&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FCi50C2kTAYs%2F</link>
            <description>Last week, editors at Politico posed two questions to an online panel to which I contribute: &amp;#8220;ACORN: Underplayed or overblown?&amp;#8221; and &amp;#8220;Will the Dems ever get their act together on healthcare?&amp;#8221;
The two are intimately connected by a simple proposition: &amp;#8220;Most people want more housing and health care than they can afford.&amp;#8221; Of course, for &amp;#8220;housing&amp;#8221; or &amp;#8220;health care&amp;#8221; one could substitute whatever one wishes: food, clothing, cars, education, entertainment, vacations, you name it. Economists call this the problem of scarcity, and it&amp;#8217;s the beginning of economics.
In a free society, most individuals, families, and firms will deal with that problem through such homely measures as creating and husbanding wealth, planning for the future, an...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2904857</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:27:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2904857</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2890619&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FbEEDdrCMNx8%2F</link>
            <description>How to measure the effectiveness of Obama&amp;#8217;s stimulus plan.


Forbes: The CBO estimate of the number of people who would stop being uninsured under the Senate Finance Committee proposal is exaggerated by at least 7 million to 10 million.


Smoke and mirrors within the Senate Finance Committee?


How to save democracy in Honduras.


Video: Economist Daniel J. Mitchell discusses economic reform on CNBC. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2890619</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:09:16 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2890619</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why the Democrats’ Health Care Overhaul May Die</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2886415&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FhFjLimHBpTU%2F</link>
            <description>The problem that Democrats have faced from Day One is finally coming to a head.
The Left and the health care industry both want universal health insurance coverage.  The industry, because universal coverage means massive new government subsidies. The Left, because that’s their religion.
But universal coverage is so expensive that Congress can’t get there without taxing Democrats.

Sen.   Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) is the biggest opponent of Sen. Max Baucus’ (D-MT) tax on expensive health plans because that tax   would hit West Virginia   coal miners.
Unions   vigorously oppose that tax because it would hit their members.
Moderate   Democrats in the House oppose Rep. Charlie Rangel’s (D-NY) supposed “millionaires surtax” because they   know it would hit small businesses in their di...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2886415</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:45:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2886415</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tuesday Links</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2823970&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2YZKytwWvzs%2F</link>
            <description>Richard Rahn on the growing debt bomb, set to explode within three years: &amp;#8220;Expect to see record high real interest rates and/or inflation, coupled with a collapse of many &amp;#8216;entitlements.&amp;#8217;&amp;#8221;


Why right wing &amp;#8220;czar mania&amp;#8221; is a needless distraction.


Obama says that &amp;#8220;nobody&amp;#8221; considers the government mandate to buy health care a tax. But here are a couple of Obama appointees who do. 


Let the battle of ideas begin: Economists debate the monetary lessons of the last recession.


Podcast: &amp;#8220;Muddling Missions in Afghanistan&amp;#8221; featuring Malou Innocent. More on Afghanistan here. (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2823970</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 20:17:31 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2823970</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Nobody Considers Health Insurance Mandates a Tax? Really??</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2820204&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fu4DpfiwkIDU%2F</link>
            <description>As my colleague Jeffrey Miron noted earlier today, when grilled by George Stephanopolous on whether the so-called &amp;#8220;individual mandate&amp;#8221; is a tax increase, Obama replied, &amp;#8220;Nobody considers that a tax increase&amp;#8230;.You can&amp;#8217;t just make up that language and decide that that&amp;#8217;s called a tax increase&amp;#8230;My critics say everything is a tax increase.&amp;#8221;
Where do Obama&amp;#8217;s critics get these wacky ideas?  From a bunch of nobodies, that&amp;#8217;s who!
Princeton economist Uwe Reinhardt, quoted by Larry Summers (1987):

[Just because] the fiscal flows triggered by mandate would not flow directly through the public budgets does not detract from the measure&amp;#8217;s status of a bona fide tax.

Economist Larry Summers, Obama&amp;#8217;s National Economic Council chair (1...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2820204</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:05:14 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2820204</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Why Chile Is More Economically Free Than the United States</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2807574&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FmYnfZsuC1Nc%2F</link>
            <description>In the 2009 Economic Freedom of the World Report, Chile is now #5, one place ahead of the United States.
In 1975, of 72 countries, Chile was No 71. How did this happen? The explanation lies in what I call the “Chilean Revolution”, because it was as important and transformative to my country as the celebrated American Revolution that gave birth to the United States.
The exceptional political circumstances of this period have obscured the fact that from 1975 to 1989 a true revolution took place in Chile, involving a radical, comprehensive, and sustained move toward economic and political freedom (from a starting point where there was neither one nor the other). This revolution not only doubled Chile&amp;#8217;s historic rate of economic growth (to an average of 7% a year, 84-98),  drastica...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2807574</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 20:52:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2807574</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Obama to Seek Cap on Federal Pay Raises</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2757738&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fp3rMEfrjB-w%2F</link>
            <description>USA Today reports that President Obama is seeking a cap on federal pay raises:
President Obama urged Congress Monday to limit cost-of-living pay raises to 2% for 1.3 million federal employees in 2010, extending an income squeeze that has hit private workers and threatens Social Security recipients and even 401(k) investors.
&amp;#8230;The president&amp;#8217;s action comes when consumer prices have fallen 2.1% in the 12 months ending in July, because of a massive drop in energy prices. The recession has taken an even tougher toll on private-sector wages, which rose only 1.5% for the year ended in June — the lowest increase since the government started keeping track in 1980. Private-sector workers also have been subject to widespread layoffs and furloughs.
Last week, economist Chris Edwards discu...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2757738</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:37:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2757738</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Sweet, and Yet Very, Very Sour</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2715922&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEYEjyI3nroc%2F</link>
            <description>My colleagues have blogged before about the recent sugar &amp;#8220;market&amp;#8221; woes. There was some hope that the USDA, which manages sugar imports very carefully to maintain U.S. prices up to three times higher than world prices, would relax the sugar quotas this year and give sugar users some well-deserved and long overdue relief.
Alas, it was not to be. According to Congress Daily, the USDA announced today [$] that there would be no increase in the import quota for the time being, and that their models saw no cause for alarm because of predicted increases in domestic production and Mexican imports (allowed special import status through NAFTA). And who cares about sugar users&amp;#8217; concerns when you have models?
The American Sugar Alliance says (sigh) that the announcement &amp;#8220;makes ...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2715922</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 19 Aug 2009 17:00:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2715922</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Rose Friedman Passes</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2712066&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F2oG1UXMFu88%2F</link>
            <description>Rose Friedman, co-author of several books with her late husband and Nobel laureate economist Milton, passed away this morning. Rose and Milton co-wrote Free to Choose the wonderful book that formed the basis of Milton&amp;#8217;s PBS television series, as well co-writing their joint auto-biography &amp;#8220;Two Lucky People.&amp;#8221;
She was intimately involved in the school choice movement both before and after Milton&amp;#8217;s passing, as co-founder of the Milton and Rose D. Friedman Foundation for School Choice, ably led by Robert Enlow.
Rose and Milton were not just skilled economists who cared about kids, they were a charming couple. At a casual policy event a decade ago, they shared a single armchair to ensure that there would be enough seats for everyone. They weren&amp;#8217;t just models of co...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2712066</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:03:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2712066</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Happy Thoughts Could Make You Sad</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2653822&amp;cid=t_152678_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F07%2F30%2Fhappy-thoughts-could-make-you-sad%2F</link>
            <description>You know how I&amp;#8217;ve been telling you all to head to the mirror and say to the gorgeous creature staring back at you: &amp;#8220;I&amp;#8217;m good enough, I&amp;#8217;m strong enough, Gosh darn it, people like me!&amp;#8221; Yah, well, forget about that now.
Because there is new research that says happy thoughts might make you sad. According The Economist:
Joanne Wood of the University of Waterloo in Canada and her colleagues designed a series of experiments [in which] they questioned a group of 68 men and women using long-accepted methods to measure self-esteem. The participants were then asked to spend four minutes writing down any thoughts and feelings that were on their minds. In the midst of this, half were randomly assigned to say to themselves, &amp;#8220;I am a lovable person&amp;#8221; every time the...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2653822</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 12:12:55 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2653822</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Is Buying an iPod Un-American?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2625952&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FUZ1NYgCkBFg%2F</link>
            <description>We own three iPods at my house, including a recently purchased iPod Touch. Since many of the iPod parts are made abroad, is my family guilty of allowing our consumer spending to “leak” abroad, depriving the American economy of the consumer stimulus we are told it so desperately needs? If you believe the “Buy American” lectures and legislation coming out of Washington, the answer must be yes.
Our friends at ReasonTV have just posted a brilliant video short, &amp;#8220;Is Your iPod Unpatriotic?&amp;#8221; With government requiring its contractors to buy American-made steel, iron, and manufactured products, is it only a matter of time before the iPod—“Assembled in China,” of all places—comes under scrutiny? You can view the video here:

In my upcoming Cato book, Mad about Trade: Why M...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2625952</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2009 19:54:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2625952</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>How Many Uninsured Are There?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2510271&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FEX0rLLmjFCE%2F</link>
            <description>The Wall Street Journal&amp;#8217;s Numbers Guy tackles the question:
The Census Bureau estimates that the number of uninsured amounts to 45.7 million people. But the agency might be over-counting by millions due to faulty assumptions&amp;#8230;
Even though legislation won&amp;#8217;t cover many of them, illegal immigrants are especially difficult to enumerate: Few raise their hands to be counted. Prof. [Jonathan] Gruber estimates they make up about 13% of the uninsured today, or nearly six million people of that 45 million number&amp;#8230;
Of the rest, some people are eligible for health insurance but don&amp;#8217;t know it and many can afford it but don&amp;#8217;t want it. About 43% of uninsured nonelderly adults have incomes greater than 2.5 times the poverty level, according to a report released Tuesday by...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2510271</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:53:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2510271</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Cost of Flu Fears - and Our Ongoing Vulnerability</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2389653&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Ft7bPpwrc5dg%2F</link>
            <description>The ever-sensible Shaun Waterman has begun to tally the cost of overreaction to the fear outbreak inspired by the H1N1 flu strain. He reports in ISN Security Watch:
Even the precautions that you take against this kind of global flu pandemic could knock about 1.9 [or] 2 percent off global [economic production]. That’s about a trillion dollars,” according to journalist Martin Walker, who cited World Bank figures from a study last year.
The Economist reported last week that the crisis in Mexico was costing Mexico City’s service and retail industries $55m a day - not because of the handful of deaths but because of people’s reactions. And that was even before the national suspension of non-essential public activities called for this week by the authorities there, which was expected to d...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2389653</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2009 18:54:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2389653</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Robert H. Frank, A 200% Tax Even Socialists Will Hate</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2375864&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2F-I-SgBwHDh0%2F</link>
            <description>In the latest issue of Forbes, Cornell University economist Robert H. Frank is pushing “A Tax Even Libertarians Can Love.” I hope he wasn’t counting on this libertarian’s support.
What he advocates is “replacing the income tax with a progressive tax on spending. &amp;#8230;A family&amp;#8217;s income minus its savings is its consumption, and that amount minus a large standard deduction &amp;#8212; say, $30,000 a year for a family of four &amp;#8212; would be its taxable consumption. &amp;#8230;Rates would start low, perhaps 20%, then rise gradually with total consumption. &amp;#8230;With savings tax-exempt, top marginal tax rates on consumption would have to be significantly higher than current top rates on income.”
His concept of “significantly higher” includes tax rates of 100-200% on marginal i...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2375864</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 19:50:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2375864</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Miron, Calabria Join Cato Institute</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2347786&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FziySqucYAlc%2F</link>
            <description>Jeffrey Miron, Director of Undergraduate Studies at Harvard&amp;#8217;s Department of Economics, has joined the Cato Institute as a Senior Fellow.
&amp;#8220;I am delighted to be working with Cato,&amp;#8221; Miron said. &amp;#8220;This is a crucial moment in our nation&amp;#8217;s history, and Cato&amp;#8217;s mission - increased understanding of the virtues of limited government, free markets, individual liberty, and peace - has rarely been more important.&amp;#8221;
Miron will help Cato&amp;#8217;s economic team promote dynamic market capitalism and economic freedom through media appearances and policy analyses, in addition to speaking engagements and outreach to the academic community.  He is the author of Drug War Crimes: The Consequences of Prohibition (Independent Institute, 2004) and The Economics of Seasonal C...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2347786</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 13:27:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2347786</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Agony of Defeat</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2347797&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2Fn1ux5-LtGnc%2F</link>
            <description>Oh, what a burn. My tax debate with French economist Thomas Piketty was a dead heat, 50-50, for the past four days. Then just as the contest was closing, he pulled ahead to seize victory, 51-49.
The Economist editor described the tightly fought battle:
Chris Edwards got over a strong initial disadvantage to narrow what was originally a strong lead for Mr Piketty to a dead heat, but eventually Mr Piketty has prevailed: but only just—even hours before closing, the vote was split exactly down the middle. One could not have asked for a closer contest: this has been the most closely-fought of our 21 online debates, although it began with a fairly substantial lead for the proposition.
Certainly, the debate revealed high levels of interest in taxation and relative income levels. There were mo...</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2347797</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:23:29 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2347797</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bailouts, Big Spending and Bull</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2255996&amp;cid=t_152678_87_f&amp;fid=36438&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FCato-at-liberty%2F%7E3%2FDz7egGLPhCQ%2F</link>
            <description>John Stossel joined economists from around the country Thursday at the Cato Institute for a taping of a 20/20 special that will air Friday March 13 called &amp;#8220;Bailouts, Big Spending and Bull.&amp;#8221;
The segment is based on Reason TV&amp;#8217;s Drew Carey Project, and examines  &amp;#8220;bailouts, medical marijuana, universal preschool, private highways, border walls, and the myth of the struggling middle class.&amp;#8221;
Check your local listings for exact air time.


Photos by Kelly Anne Creazzo (Source: Cato-at-liberty)</description>
            <author>Cato-at-liberty</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2255996</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2009 00:40:26 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2255996</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Paul Rubin Should Stick to Economics</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1920936&amp;cid=t_152678_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2008%2F10%2F31%2Fpaul-rubin-should-stick-to-economics%2F</link>
            <description>I&amp;#8217;m not sure what drives economist Paul Rubin to write the editorial that appeared in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Tuesday. He appears to make the argument that unless pharmaceutical companies are allowed to consult with academicians, research (and therefore, ultimately new treatments and patients who might benefit from them) will suffer.
	But nobody&amp;#8217;s ever suggested banning such communication.
	In a bizarre twist of logic that only someone suffering from psychosis might be able to appreciate, he apparently believes that Senator&amp;#8217;s Grassley&amp;#8217;s investigations are about stifling communication and innovation. Grassley has never said or claimed that researchers and pharmaceutical companies shouldn&amp;#8217;t talk. All he has said is that if they talk &amp;#8212; and the r...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1920936</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 10:08:46 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1920936</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Epigenetics: Nature vs. Nurture?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1892348&amp;cid=t_152678_122_f&amp;fid=36582&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FSharpBrains%2F%7E3%2F425646928%2F</link>
            <description>In yesterday's interview with Michael Posner, he says:
- &amp;quot;There is a growing number of studies that show the importance of interaction between our genes and each of our environments. Epigenetics is going to help us understand that question better, but let me share a very interesting piece of research from my lab where we found an unusual interaction between genetics and parenting.&amp;quot;
- &amp;quot;Good parenting, as measured by different research-based scales, has been shown to build good effortful control which, as we saw earlier, is so important. Now, what we found is that some specific genes reduced, even eliminated, the influence of the quality of parenting. In other words, some children's development really depends on how their parents bring them up, whereas others do not - or do to...</description>
            <author>SharpBrains</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1892348</comments>
            <pubDate>Sun, 19 Oct 2008 17:57:03 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1892348</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Bail Out the Fat Cats” Edition of the Health Wonk Review</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1848056&amp;cid=t_152678_113_f&amp;fid=35744&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Fe-CareManagement%2F%7E3%2F409431524%2F</link>
            <description>Jason Shafrin of Healthcare Economist provides “700 billion reasons to read the Health Wonk Review ”.
Read about how the bail out might affect health care from the POV of:

Wall Street
Health Insurers
Healthcare Reformers
Doctors
The Uninsured
Kids (Source: e-CareManagement)</description>
            <author>e-CareManagement</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1848056</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 17:07:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1848056</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Bail Out the Fat Cats” Edition of the Health Wonk Review</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2580323&amp;cid=t_152678_113_f&amp;fid=35744&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fe-CareManagement%2F%7E3%2FHb8AG_zQg64%2F</link>
            <description>Jason Shafrin of Healthcare Economist provides “700 billion reasons to read the Health Wonk Review ”.
Read about how the bail out might affect health care from the POV of:

Wall Street
Health Insurers
Healthcare Reformers
Doctors
The Uninsured
Kids (Source: e-CareManagement)</description>
            <author>e-CareManagement</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2580323</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:51:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2580323</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Bail Out the Fat Cats” Edition of the Health Wonk Review</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2511439&amp;cid=t_152678_113_f&amp;fid=35744&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2Fe-CareManagement%2F%7E3%2FHb8AG_zQg64%2F</link>
            <description>Jason Shafrin of Healthcare Economist provides “700 billion reasons to read the Health Wonk Review ”.
Read about how the bail out might affect health care from the POV of:

Wall Street
Health Insurers
Healthcare Reformers
Doctors
The Uninsured
Kids (Source: e-CareManagement)</description>
            <author>e-CareManagement</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2511439</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Oct 2008 16:51:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2511439</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Tierney’s Attempted Take-Down of Psychology</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1364912&amp;cid=t_152678_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2008%2F04%2F10%2Ftierneys-attempted-take-down-of-psychology%2F</link>
            <description>John Tierney is a science journalist for the New York Times and he has an issue with psychology. Specifically, he has a problem apparently with cognitive dissonance (a feeling of uncomfortable tension which comes from holding two conflicting thoughts in your mind at the same time). And he thinks an economist &amp;#8212; who hasn&amp;#8217;t actually published any peer-reviewed research on this issue &amp;#8212; might have proven decades&amp;#8217; worth of psychological research wrong. 
	The challenge is that without peer-review, science is just one expert&amp;#8217;s opinion against another&amp;#8217;s in the court of public opinion. Sway an influential journalist like Tierney into your camp, and suddenly the media spotlight is on you and other media outlets report your findings as fact. When they&amp;#8217;re not &amp;...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1364912</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:00:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1364912</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Media In Medicine: What of the Insurance Companies &amp; Other Issues?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1225336&amp;cid=t_152678_145_f&amp;fid=35710&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fstoryofhealing.com%2F2008%2F02%2F12%2Fmedia-in-medicine-what-of-the-insurance-companies-other-issues%2F</link>
            <description>The Lost Angeles Times recently reported more of these online consults.
Doctor visits in the United States have surged 20% in the last five years to more than 1.2 billion visits annually, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Even as the population ages, the number of doctors is falling across the country, and experts predict that office wait times will increase in the coming years.
&amp;#8212;
&amp;#8220;People can wait a long time to get in to see their primary-care doctor and longer for a specialist. . . . To have immediate access is huge,&amp;#8221; said Dr. Melissa Welch, Aetna&amp;#8217;s Northern California medical director.


Insurance companies apparently opened up and expanded coverage to these web-based services, according to the same article.
&amp;#8230;Aetna Inc., the natio...</description>
            <author>the story of healing</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1225336</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 21:14:57 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1225336</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Latest Edition of the Health Wonk Review</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=961780&amp;cid=t_152678_113_f&amp;fid=35744&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2Fe-CareManagement%2F%7E3%2F171641428%2F</link>
            <description>Read the best recent efforts of health care bloggers!  The latest edition of the Health Wonk Review is posted at Jason Shifrin&amp;#8217;s Healthcare Economist blog.  Thanks, Jason.
  Share This (Source: e-CareManagement)</description>
            <author>e-CareManagement</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=961780</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:33:56 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">961780</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>“Why so much medical research is rot”</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=483038&amp;cid=t_152678_117_f&amp;fid=34612&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedoctorweighsin.com%2Fjournal%2F2007%2F3%2F19%2Fwhy-so-much-medical-research-is-rot.html</link>
            <description>A brief article in the February 24, 2007 issue of The Economist, with the title &amp;ldquo;Why so much medical research is rot&amp;rdquo; describes how poorly designed and poorly interpreted medical research is polluting the medical literature and confusing the public. You know the kind of studies I am talking about. They are usually observational studies purporting to show a relationship between two things (e.g., eating lemons and having blond hair). These studies are ubiquitous and often garner headlines. Some of them have even earned space on TDWI, but hopefully always with the caveat that the studies are not the gold standard in research, that is, the randomized controlled clinical trial.The Economist article describes a presentation to the American Association for the Advancement of Science b...</description>
            <author>The Doctor Weighs In</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=483038</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2007 03:25:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">483038</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

