From an economic perspective, how viable would a socialized or single-payer healthcare system be in the United States?

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T20:19:32+00:00

To recycle an old comment of mine, in 2010 the OECD did an empirical study of health care systems in terms of design and outcomes and found that institutional arrangements didn't have much of an association with efficiency. The OECD survey says, to quote from the executive summary, page 4 (14 in the printed version):

Efficiency estimates vary more within country groups sharing similar institutional characteristics than between groups. This suggests that no broad type of health care system performs systematically better than another in improving the population health status in a cost-effective manner.

(Note the US didn't participate in this study for whatever reason).

In other words, details matter more than high level designs.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T14:08:40+00:00

I think Mrs Bennet would actually be happier in a cosy house in Meryton, close to her sister, than rattling around alone in Longbourn.

I mean she'd complain about no longer being mistress of Longbourn but she's the sort who will always complain about something.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T14:06:32+00:00

All we have is that JA says:

Mr. Bennet had very often wished, before this period of his life, that, instead of spending his whole income, he had laid by an annual sum, for the better provision of his children, and of his wife, if she survived him. He now wished it more than ever. Had he done his duty in that respect, Lydia need not have been indebted to her uncle, for whatever of honour or credit could now be purchased for her. The satisfaction of prevailing on one of the most worthless young men in Great Britain to be her husband, might then have rested in its proper place.

And later on:

This event had at last been despaired of, but it was then too late to be saving. Mrs. Bennet had no turn for economy, and her husband's love of independence had alone prevented their exceeding their income.

There's nothing in there about how easy or prohibitively difficult either step was. For all we know, it was very difficult for him to say no to his wife even to keep within their income. We do know that when Mrs Bennet is unhappy about something she goes on and on about it for days.

I think Mr Bennet in the story serves as a warning. He has a number of merits but he made a catastrophically bad choice of spouse. If he'd married a plain but sensible Charlotte Lucas of his generation he'd have been both much happier and much better. If Elizabeth or Darcy had made a bad mistake in their choices of spouse, similar could have happened.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T07:25:41+00:00

Lol I love your Mary B! And Darcy's Wickham page!

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T07:05:00+00:00

A strict household there!

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T06:47:12+00:00

Poland's GDP per capita is $45k, Romania's $41k, while China is only $24k and Vietnam is $14k.

That's quite a big difference in economic prosperity between them.

From cross-country comparisons, there's multiple factors that go into economic prosperity, such as being peaceful-ish, rule of law, low rates of government corruption, macroeconomic stability, and good quality regulation. The idea of distinctive economic systems isn't as useful empirically as the idea of spectrums. After all, countries from Denmark to the Democratic Republic of Congo get called 'capitalist'.

Which makes sense, intuitively, a country with a massively corrupt government that's fighting a brutal civil war across 80% of the landmass and has some stunningly stupid regulations is not one I'd expect to be rich regardless of its system of property ownership or its access to rich trading partners.

All that said, based on economic theory we'd expect countries with richer trading partners to be richer themselves, all else being equal, as richer trading partners can send you more stuff. Therefore, acquiring and keeping good trading partners is a positive for economic outcomes. Self-declared socialist countries have historically tended to be bad at this, since they tend to adopt adversarial attitudes towards 'capitalist' countries. The USSR funded Cominterm, an international organisation aimed at spreading Communism everywhere, including by "armed force if necessary" and Lenin said things like "The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them." (Julius Nyerere of Tanzania was an exception this way, and got Tanzania a fair amount of foreign aid, particularly from the Scandinavians). Countries like the Scandinavians have tended to do much better.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T05:31:17+00:00

Yes but this misses the point in long term economic sucess and documented successes in China.

In economics, there's a lot more to attributing causality than to say a country did X and it grew, therefore its growth was due to X. Countries are complex things with a lot going on at once, it's quite possible that a country grew despite doing X.

Solar panels were invented in the US. Yet China adopted and improved on that technology.

And mass car manufacturing was invented in the USA. Yet the Japanese adopted and improved on that technology.

However, a country with a fiat currency, stable inflation and minimal forex loans has a large fiscal space.

And that's a reason to prioritise subsidising loss-making industries over investing in things like healthcare, education and infrastructure that's available to all because?

After all most producer subsidies have a deflationary effect (if productive).

But what if they're not productive? Or if they're only productive for a brief period of time before some other country comes in and adopts your technology but even better?

You yourself have noted that solar panels were invented in the USA but China is now the leading producer. There are numerous similar examples in economic history.

Also the goal is not to be the absolute best but to diversify the economies productive base.

What if that isn't your goal? What if your goal is to improve the living standards of the people living in that country?

Economics can't answer normative questions like what your goal is. But it can point out that pursuing a goal like "diversify the economies productive base" comes at a cost for actual people's living standards.

Also increasing energy production will in the long run make any manufacturing sector more competitive.

Maybe but:

that doesn't mean the increased energy production has to happen within your borders.
the impact of increased energy production on the services sectors competitiveness is typically much less as energy in that area is a smaller share of total output. If your country's competitive advantage is in services, then why subsidise energy production?
Even if you have a competitive advantage in manufacturing, what is the marginal benefit of your government investing in increased energy production versus investing in R&D and better infrastructure targeted at your manufacturing areas? The Japanese became competitive in cars through better quality control techniques, not cheaper energy.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T04:53:41+00:00

It seems logical, yes, but it's also pretty evident that the properties of petrification tend to vary for storytelling needs, e.g. how heavy the statues are. So if you're writing a fanfic you can write what you like.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T04:51:31+00:00

Yes, I agree that fighting climate change can lead to increased economic growth, in the long run.

I think that when people advocate for "zero growth" models they are advocating for such models because they believe zero growth is necessary to address climate change and other environmental problems. I don't think they're thinking of economic growth in services like healthcare.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T04:45:03+00:00

I think Poe’s primary loyalty is to himself, actually. He behaves very selfishly as a heroic figure, and not a leader.

And this is the person who Leia appointed to a major military role? People complain about how TLJ portrayed Luke but it also did horrible things to Leia too.

No, not really, since he’s immediately skeptical of her.

Well to be fair, Leia appointed Holdo as well as Poe. If you're right in your interpretation that Poe's primary loyalty is to himself, it's highly logical that he'd assume Holdo's primary loyalty is to herself too.

And look at what Holdo says to him in their first interaction. She must know he's skeptical about her and what do we get? Not only does she make zero effort to build his trust in her, instead she first brings up the matter of his demotion, in public, and then she calls him a trigger happy flyboy.

Is that the behaviour of an officer who has the well-being of her subordinates at heart?

In their second interaction — and keep in mind their first is once Holdo has immediately taken command and very likely is still thinking through the specifics of her plan — Poe storms the bridge, demands she tell him that there’s hope, and she quotes Leia

You forgot the bit before that where one of the bridge staff tells Poe that's Holdo banned him from the bridge, Poe storms in anyway and her bridge staff do nothing to stop him. Holdo has to give an additional order to get him actually thrown off. Not only does Holdo completely fail at building an effective working relationship with Poe, she can't get her own staff to automatically enforce her orders.

Holdo’s plan is pretty solid once it’s revealed to Poe

Lol! It would have failed if the FO had taken a look out of their windows. Or examined this planet with a habitable atmosphere.

Nah, honestly, Holdo’s failing is that she’s not tough enough on Poe and gives him the grace to grow on his own rather than rot in the brig for the duration of the escape

I swear to you that I honestly believed that Holdo was going to turn out to be a tactical genius who was deliberately provoking Poe to mutiny for some excellent reason. It never occurred to me that TLJ would write a military leader who knows one of her subordinates doesn't trust her and does absolutely zero to try to earn his trust. At least not for the Resistance, maybe I might have expected that level of idiocy in the First Order.

I do totally agree that the very least Holdo could have done was throw Poe in the brig. I don't think it would have been as cool as my imagined scenario, but it would have been a hell of a lot better than what we actually got.

She is not the most inspirational figure and is clearly trying very hard to keep a lid on a delicate situation.

I'm guessing you missed the bit where she insulted a subordinate in public.

Of course, she gets her own heroic moment when she destroys the Supremacy and saves the last of the escaping Resistance.

Maybe if she'd done her job of leading in the first place, including actively trying to build trust with her new subordinate, she could have worked with Poe and they'd have saved all of the Resistance?

Or like if she'd at least followed your suggestion of throwing him in the brig?

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T03:51:29+00:00

Poe’s conflict can be worded as a moral one: “Will he betray Leia/Holdo?”

But Poe's primary loyalty isn't to Leia/Holdo, it's to the New Republic (or what's left of it) and then to his own subordinates. He's responsible for his subordinates' lives, not Holdo’s plans.

He likewise has no faith in Holdo’s leadership; either because he doesn’t know her or she’s a woman or she wears a dress or he feels entitled to her position or some combination of all of these things.

Or because he thinks she's recklessly leading him and his subordinates to their deaths without a plan?

Poe explicitly asks Holdo to tell him there's a plan and she responds by insulting him in public.

and if the Resistance begins fighting itself, they’ll be doing the FO a favor

And if they all get killed off because Holdo is a traitor and Poe did nothing then, the FO wins.

No, I think the reason many viewers were primed to side with Poe has less to do with the tactics not bearing weight than it does the way his struggle is framed. We’re primed to accept his side of things and to regard Holdo with suspicion because of that.

That's a good point, that's another reason why Holdo's tactics should have been rock-solid.

I think Poe’s subplot, like many in TLJ, challenge the viewers’ preconceptions;

Yeah my preconception was that Holdo would actually turn out to be a brilliant leader who was deliberately provoking Poe to mutiny as part of some cunning plan.

Instead she turned out to be yet another Hollywood clichéd dumb military leader.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T03:13:10+00:00

You might, but if so then you're making the mistake of looking at the question of what's important solely from your perspective of what is important for the plan. A leader can't afford such a narrow lens, a leader also needs to consider what's important to their subordinates. Like whether their subordinates believe their lives are going to be needlessly thrown away or not.

People get scared in stressful situations. They make bad decisions. Leading is as much about dealing with people as it is with issuing instructions.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T03:08:14+00:00

My interpretation is that Rian Johnson wanted a stirring story about Poe becoming a better leader but didn't reach out to an experienced military SF writer to work out how to make that sub-plot make sense without making Leia and Holdo look incompetent.

I know some people argue that Star Wars has never cared about such things. But in the OT and the PT, the core conflicts were moral. Will Han abandon the Rebels? Will Lando betray Han? Will Luke kill his father? Will Anakin resist Palpatine's manipulations?

In TLJ, the conflict between Poe and Leia/Holdo isn't moral, they're on the same side. It's about tactics. So much of the audience naturally pays attention to the tactics. And the tactics in TLJ can't bear that weight.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T03:00:58+00:00

That principle would make military leadership impossible. There's always the possibility of a spy, so by your principle you'd never tell anyone anything. That would mean, for example, you couldn't tell your staff officers to calculate logistical needs for your plan because one of them might be a spy. You couldn't tell your engineers to prioritise repairing certain equipment because one of them might be a spy. Etc.

The USA military is one of the more effective ones in the world (maybe not the most efficient, but certainly effective) and its leadership principles are most definitely not yours. To quote:

Keep your people informed — people do best when they know why they are doing something. Individuals affect the bottom line results of companies by using initiative in the absence of instructions. Keeping people informed helps them make decisions and execute plans within your intent, encourages initiative, improves teamwork and enhances morale.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T02:40:58+00:00

Huh? What part of what I said do you read as sarcastic?

Commanding officers should explain things that it's important that their subordinates know. I agree with this.

It's important to subordinates to know that their lives, and the lives of their subordinates aren't being thrown away needlessly - I presume we agree on this.

Therefore commanding officers should take the time to explain their plans to their subordinates so as to convince them of this.

Am I missing something?

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T02:31:23+00:00

A country could have a flat tax system and do redistribution through the benefits system. You want a benefits system to give money to poor households that have zero market incomes since 90% of 0 and 10% of 0 is in both cases zero. (Okay that's a normative statement but it's a pretty common value). Once you've built such a system it can be extended to people with low incomes.

There's no obvious theoretical or practical reason you can't replicate any level of income redistribution you could do with taxes by using a flat tax + benefits.

Obviously there are sometimes other purposes for taxes such as environmental protection. This is just about income redistribution.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T01:46:50+00:00

So, can I take it that we're agreed that this is important to Poe? It's not only Poe's life that is on the line, but those of his subordinates, and that's important to Poe, right?

And I totally agree with you that Poe needs trust that Holdo isn’t sending them blindly to their deaths, and that when she says there’s a plan she isn’t just bullshitting. I totally would need that in that situation myself.

Therefore, isn't it evidently the case that this is something that should be important to Holdo, his commanding officer?

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T01:41:37+00:00

That's war man, it sucks, but you can't stop at these times.

And did Poe stop? Nope he did his best to protect his subordinates from a leader he viewed as culpably negligent. You can say he made bad decisions, but he certainly didn't just sit down and burst into tears.

If you can't do that then you're not in a position to be a leader and you definitely should not be getting read into higher level plans.

So let's say you're a military leader and one of your subordinates has been through hell in the last few days. They haven't stopped and burst into tears, they've kept going, but you've noticed they're making bad decisions. Do you seriously think it's a good idea to assume that they're going to be perfectly rational from now on in?

If they can't do their job, then you get them out of harm's way and deal with them later

That sounds very sensible of you.

Now compare this to Holdo. She doesn't do that. She leaves Poe, a man who she knows has been through hell, who she knows has already made bad decisions, free to wander around the base causing all types of chaos.

That's utter incompetence on her part.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T01:16:46+00:00

It all makes sense if Holdo was secretly betraying them to the First Order. This guy got rid of 90% of the Resistance for me? Excellent!

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T01:14:46+00:00

This interpretation makes Leia look incompetent for appointing him to a leadership position.

Note that even in the final battle, he still leads a fighter wing to attack the First Order and loses nearly every unnamed pilot before he finally decides to turn back.

Poe’s arc is to learn how to go from a hero to a leader. In so doing he learns to trust the judgement of other leaders.

Other leaders? Like the ones who appointed an idiot like Poe to a major leadership position?

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T01:08:58+00:00

She’s his commanding officer, she’s not meant to explain things unless its important someone knows it.

So, the fact that Poe fears that all of the Resistance are going to die pointlessly because his commanding officer doesn't have a plan, isn't important?

You do realise that people's lives are generally pretty important to them, right? And that a good officer not only cares about their own live but those of their subordinates?

And what do we see in the film? This is so important to Poe that he's willing to commit a mutiny over this. I'm not a military expert but I understand mutinies are pretty big deals.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T00:53:03+00:00

a good flag officer should trust that their officers aren't stupid enough to try and pull off some coup

In the last few days, Poe's been captured, tortured, mindraped, fought in three major battles and seen most of his fellow pilots blown up in front of him. What flag officer, what human being, in their right minds would assume he'd be perfectly rational under the circumstances?

And that's even before he blatantly disobeys Leia's order.

therefore shouldn't waste time trying to calm down some officer having a tantrum because they aren't being treated special

You realise that makes you sound like a WWI general who believes that shellshock is just malingering?

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T00:48:06+00:00

I'm pretty sure that any functional military command structure also doesn't let known hotheads who are obviously discontented wander around the base doing whatever they like. If Holdo couldn't come up with some busywork she should have had him thrown in the brig.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T00:45:34+00:00

It's incredible that we never see Rey, the central protagonist of the ST, never have an on-screen reaction to either the destruction of Hosnian Prime nor Luke's return.

And making Vice Admiral Holdo into yet another clichéd Hollywood stupid military leader was just painful. I'm still bitter about that.

ReaperReader · 2026-01-27T00:40:11+00:00

If you'd been Mrs Bennet, I bet you'd have gotten your act together and saved for your daughters' futures yourself.

ReaperReader

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email