Why Not Give Universal Footwear a Try?
I know it's a little late to be suggesting this since Obamacare is already law. But what we should have done before screwing up one-sixth of the US economy is run an experiment: Let the government set up an agency to manage the design, manufacture, distribution and retailing of all footwear. After about ten years we could have a go at Obamacare using the footwear agency's model, if we find that the government agency has managed to satisfy everyone's wants and needs for footwear without increasing its cost.
The availability of footwear might not be as important as the availability of health-care, but it is something that nearly everyone uses. In fact, I'd bet there are more people in this country who do without health-care than do without footwear. And, as with health-care, there are people who do without some of their footwear needs because they can't afford it.
To be a fair experiment the approach taken to satisfy the footwear wants and needs of the people should be left completely up to the President, his Director of Footwear, the Footwear Commission and the DoF's staff. If, after considering her mandate and consulting her FC, the DoF decides that the existing free market system is the best means to satisfy the footwear demands, so be it. This outcome would be very telling. But we all know it's not likely to happen.
The first thing the DoF is most likely to do is address the affordability issue. And part of that issue is the matter of footwear envy. There are many people who would want the best footwear available even when they can't afford it and many of those would feel they have a right to the best footwear available. The DoF will find that there are several ways to deal with these issues:
- Produce only plain, inexpensive, utilitarian footwear so that everyone can afford it and everyone will be wearing the same footwear. Petition Congress to ban the import and wearing of foreign-made footwear.
- Levy a tax on the wealthy so everyone can have the footwear they want.
- Tell the poor that they will have to make do with the footwear they can afford, and deal with their envy of the more wealthy, because the Footwear Agency is subsidizing the low-cost footwear with the profits from the fancy expensive footwear.
The DoF will likely take the first approach above because Congress might be reluctant to pass a shoe tax and because she wouldn't want to face all the rowdy protesters offended by her talking tough to the poor. This will lead to demands from people for nicer footwear. To address those demands and keep the footwear affordable for the poor the DoF will impose price controls on the materials, equipment and services needed for footwear production. This will then lead to the need for price controls on everything that affects the production or availability of the footwear materials, equipment and services. And so on down the line.
The price controls will lead to footwear shortages, footwear rationing and a black-market for footwear. The DoF will establish an enforcement division to counter the black-market which is severely diminishing its revenue stream. She might call it the "war on illegal shoes."
Even if the DoF chooses to start with the existing free market system the temptation to meddle will be too much for her to resist. With her mandate and the inevitable demands from various "progressive" causes she will impose regulations beyond those already in place. The unintended consequences from these new regulations will call for additional regulations, and so on. To prevent footwear companies from collapsing from the weight of all these regulations she will have to bail them out financially, taking effective control of the companies. Then we're back to the scenario described above.
After ten years of the Footwear Agency Congress could have then tried to implement Obamacare. But no, we have already plunged into government run health-care without giving it a second thought.
Comments
Make a comment:
- Government is Friction
- We Have Too Many Experts
- Money is Not Wealth
- The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- Arizonans React to San Diego Boycott
- Let's Use Afghanistan as an Entitlement Testbed
- Socially Disadvantaged Farmer or Rancher
- Even Charity is Not Always a Good Thing
- Why Not Give Universal Footwear a Try?
- Supporters of New Health Care Acts Disingenuous
- anhinga on The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- Carson on The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- anhinga on The Minimum Wage and Cotton Pickers
- Carson on Arizonans React to San Diego Boycott
- anhinga on Arizonans React to San Diego Boycott
- anhinga, 31 July 2010
- Carson, 19 June 2010
- Liquid Egg Product, 18 June 2010
- Carson, 02 May 2010
- Liquid Egg Product, 01 May 2010
- Anhinga
- Carnival of Climate Change
- Ekawaaz
- Flashpoint
- Florida Cracker
- I Can Plainly See
- Ironic Surrealism
- Liquid Egg Product
- Ms Understood
- The Hatemongers Quarterly
- Truth, Lies and Character
Hey Carson. I'm a fellow Symphonian (Symphony user). Great post! I, too, am a believer in our Constitution, and it is quite sad, how their oath of office means absolutely nothing... to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Just like the health care bill, I don't think the read what they are supposed to protect.
Thanks for your posts. Very practical and insightful. It's nice to know some folks are actually paying attention and care about our liberty and freedom in our great country.
Brian, thanks for the encouraging words. I keep trying to explain in simple terms why "there is no free lunch," although I know not too many people ever see my posts.
You make too much sense. No body will listen. Their minds can't grasp your financial concepts no matter how simply you lay them out. It's a shame. More people should hear you. Perhaps you could submit this as a guest editorial in your local paper.
Thanks for the encouragement, Beda. I'll give it some thought.