9 ms·

"Where are the schools? Where are the hospitals? Where are the houses?" The problem with healthcare, education, and housing is they become too expensive for th

by dpweb 6y ago

"Where are the schools? Where are the hospitals? Where are the houses?" The problem with healthcare, education, and housing is they become too expensive for the average person. This is not because we don't create enough of these things. We create enormous amounts of each. One of the main problems is precisely that we feel the need to create more of them and (in the name of benevolence), large amounts of money floods the system and causes inflation. Unlimited college loan limits, government paid for healthcare, 2% mortgage rates. Even allowing 8 year car loans! Notice that every overpriced essential item is backed by a massive government and/or credit stimulus. Clearly, the seemingly intractable "problems" of society are a) not intractable b) being perceived wrongly. Aside are the political games that manipulate public opinion and wrongly influence people on the issues.

rogerkirkness 6y ago
It does seem like the future of humanity rests on those in offices learning how second and third order consequences work.
- pmohun 6y ago
  You’ve probably seen this, but posting in case you haven’t: https://dominiccummings.com/2020/01/02/two-hands-are-a-lot-were-hiring-data-scientists-project-managers-policy-experts-assorted-weirdos/ https://dominiccummings.com/2020/01/02/two-hands-are-a-lot-w...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
take_a_breath 6y ago
Other countries are able to provide these same things with even more government support. Somehow, they end up costing even less. How does your theory explain that fact?
- pxeboot 6y ago
  At least with housing, London, Sydney, Vancouver and other major cities are even more expensive than the US when adjusted for earnings.
- roenxi 6y ago
  Which other countries are we talking here? I'll guess Europe. The United States covers ~1/3 of a continent and has ~1/3 of a million people who make up probably the most diverse ever polity on the planet. They can't adopt approaches that don't scale really well. Compare that to, say, Sweden. Small physically, small population wise, although they are a lot more diverse than they used to be. Nevertheless, they can reasonably adopt policies that do not scale and target a group of people with very similar experiences. For the US to provide Schools/Hospitals/Houses services comparable to the European countries it would be done at the State level. At the Federal level it is to some degree unprecedented to provide services at the level of quality and at the scale.
  - gspr 6y ago
    Another one! I keep hearing this over and over again. Can you PLEASE explain how these things won't scale from a few million people to a few hundred million people? Of course there are some things that only work in very tiny places, like the prince of Liechtenstein inviting all citizens to a garden party at his place – and some things that only work in very big places, like a manned lunar program. But why wouldn't things like hospitals and schools scale well for the range "a few million" (Sweden in your example) to "a few hundred million" (the US in your example)? Sorry that I'm getting all worked up here, but I feel like a crazy person for being presented with this argument over and over and not grasping even a fraction of it! Nobody says "oh, those things from Sweden won't scale to Germany (10x)", but for some reason this conversation keeps getting shut down with "oh, those things from Germany can't possibly scale to the US (4x)". Above I'm only talking about population, because surely you don't actually mean that "small physically" has a positive effect on hospitals, schools and housing? If we were discussing transportation infrastructure, sure, but…
    - 6y ago
nostrademons 6y ago
No, it absolutely is because we do not create enough of these things. In industries where there really is an abundance of supply and that supply is controlled by many firms - things like food, or manufacturing, or houses in the Rust Belt, or haircuts - it's really difficult to raise prices. Customers will just go to the firm next door who's struggling for business and sitting idle. That we think there's "enough" of health care, education, and housing indicates that our view of "enough" is warped. "Enough" housing doesn't mean that you have 2 bidders on each house instead of 10. It means that you have vacant units sitting empty, and so if a landlord tries to raise rents, you go rent from (or squat in) the unit next door. Similarly, "enough" education isn't that you get into half of the colleges you apply to. It's that when you want an education, you log onto the Internet and get one for free. "Enough" health care means that going to a doctor is as easy and cheap as getting a haircut (which, given the amount of training needed to be a good doctor, seems unlikely without some really good AI). The loans and government stimulus don't help. You get inflation when you have lots of money chasing few goods, and so areas with a lot of money involved (housing, health care, and education) tend to get high prices. But providers wouldn't be able to charge those high prices in the first place unless there aren't enough goods & services to go around for everyone.

by dpweb 6y ago

rogerkirkness 6y ago

It does seem like the future of humanity rests on those in offices learning how second and third order consequences work.

pmohun 6y ago
You’ve probably seen this, but posting in case you haven’t: https://dominiccummings.com/2020/01/02/two-hands-are-a-lot-were-hiring-data-scientists-project-managers-policy-experts-assorted-weirdos/ https://dominiccummings.com/2020/01/02/two-hands-are-a-lot-w...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

take_a_breath 6y ago

Other countries are able to provide these same things with even more government support. Somehow, they end up costing even less. How does your theory explain that fact?

pxeboot 6y ago
At least with housing, London, Sydney, Vancouver and other major cities are even more expensive than the US when adjusted for earnings.
roenxi 6y ago
Which other countries are we talking here? I'll guess Europe. The United States covers ~1/3 of a continent and has ~1/3 of a million people who make up probably the most diverse ever polity on the planet. They can't adopt approaches that don't scale really well. Compare that to, say, Sweden. Small physically, small population wise, although they are a lot more diverse than they used to be. Nevertheless, they can reasonably adopt policies that do not scale and target a group of people with very similar experiences. For the US to provide Schools/Hospitals/Houses services comparable to the European countries it would be done at the State level. At the Federal level it is to some degree unprecedented to provide services at the level of quality and at the scale.
- gspr 6y ago
  Another one! I keep hearing this over and over again. Can you PLEASE explain how these things won't scale from a few million people to a few hundred million people? Of course there are some things that only work in very tiny places, like the prince of Liechtenstein inviting all citizens to a garden party at his place – and some things that only work in very big places, like a manned lunar program. But why wouldn't things like hospitals and schools scale well for the range "a few million" (Sweden in your example) to "a few hundred million" (the US in your example)? Sorry that I'm getting all worked up here, but I feel like a crazy person for being presented with this argument over and over and not grasping even a fraction of it! Nobody says "oh, those things from Sweden won't scale to Germany (10x)", but for some reason this conversation keeps getting shut down with "oh, those things from Germany can't possibly scale to the US (4x)". Above I'm only talking about population, because surely you don't actually mean that "small physically" has a positive effect on hospitals, schools and housing? If we were discussing transportation infrastructure, sure, but…
  - 6y ago

nostrademons 6y ago

No, it absolutely is because we do not create enough of these things. In industries where there really is an abundance of supply and that supply is controlled by many firms - things like food, or manufacturing, or houses in the Rust Belt, or haircuts - it's really difficult to raise prices. Customers will just go to the firm next door who's struggling for business and sitting idle. That we think there's "enough" of health care, education, and housing indicates that our view of "enough" is warped. "Enough" housing doesn't mean that you have 2 bidders on each house instead of 10. It means that you have vacant units sitting empty, and so if a landlord tries to raise rents, you go rent from (or squat in) the unit next door. Similarly, "enough" education isn't that you get into half of the colleges you apply to. It's that when you want an education, you log onto the Internet and get one for free. "Enough" health care means that going to a doctor is as easy and cheap as getting a haircut (which, given the amount of training needed to be a good doctor, seems unlikely without some really good AI). The loans and government stimulus don't help. You get inflation when you have lots of money chasing few goods, and so areas with a lot of money involved (housing, health care, and education) tend to get high prices. But providers wouldn't be able to charge those high prices in the first place unless there aren't enough goods & services to go around for everyone.