Priceless Politics: Part II With all the advances in
sophisticated analysis by professional economists, very little of even
the basic principles of economics has gotten down to the average
citizen and voter. Many, if not most, of the economic policies advocated by
politicians today would never pass muster if the average voter
understood as much economics as an economist like Alfred Marshall
understood 100 years ago or David Ricardo 200 years ago.
Nothing is more basic in economics than prices -- and yet the role
of prices is repeatedly ignored or even misrepresented by politicians
and the media.
What do prices do?
Prices impose the most effective kind of rationing --
self-rationing. Why is rationing necessary? Because what everybody
wants always adds up to more than there is.
It doesn't matter whether you are talking about a capitalist
economy, a socialist economy, a feudal economy or whatever. Resources
are limited but desires are not. That is the basic and defining problem
of economics.
Prices force you to limit your claims on what other people have
produced to the value of what you have produced for other people.
Prices force you to limit how much of product A you buy because you
need to keep some money to buy product B.
While prices convey these limitations, they do not cause them.
No economy -- capitalist, socialist, feudal or whatever -- can keep
consuming more than it produces. Producing more of product A means
using up resources needed to produce product B.
Simple and obvious as all this may seem, politicians blithely
ignore it when they promise to make the prices of housing or health
care or other things "reasonable" or "affordable." Nothing is easier for any government than to impose price
controls. Governments have been doing that for thousands of years. What
governments cannot control are the underlying realities expressed
through prices.
What does the history of thousands of years of price controls tell us?
The first thing undermined or destroyed is self-rationing. When
you pay the full price of going to a doctor, you go there when you have
a broken leg but not when you have the sniffles or a minor skin rash.
When the government makes health care "affordable," you go there for
sniffles and a minor skin rash.
The underlying reality has not changed, however. The doctor's
time is still limited, and the time that you take up with your sniffles
or skin rash is time that somebody else with a broken leg -- or perhaps
cancer -- has to wait to get an appointment.
Government-run health care systems in countries around the
world have longer waits -- sometimes months -- to get medical
attention. In other words, the rationing goes on, but more haphazardly,
because prices do not force people to ration themselves according to
the seriousness of their problem.
It is the same story when housing prices are controlled by
government. Rent control has allowed some people to take up more
housing space than they would if they had to pay the full price that
reflects other people's demand for housing. The net result, whether in New York or San Francisco or
elsewhere, is a lot of apartments with just one person living in each,
and lots of families who cannot find a vacant place to move into.
Housing shortages have resulted from rent control in cities around the
world.
Housing shortages mean that some people are forced to live far
from their jobs and commute, and some become homeless on the street.
Homelessness tends to be greater in cities with rent control -- New
York and San Francisco again being classic examples.
Economists have long been saying that there is no free lunch
but politicians get elected by promising free lunches. Controlling
prices creates the illusion of free lunches.
Prices not only ration existing supplies, they also determine
how many new supplies will be forthcoming. When a new pharmaceutical
drug costs an average of $800 million to develop, there is no point
talking about "affordable" medications.
Either the $800 million is going to be paid or the supply of new drugs will dry up. Controlling prices does not change that.
By Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Tents
for homeless people line the Canal Saint Martin in Paris, a few hours
before the new year, December 31 2006. The French association "Enfants
de Don Quichotte" (Children of Don Quichotte) set up the tents on
December 17 to draw attention to the need for long-term accommodation
solutions for the city's homeless. REUTERS/Charles Platiau (FRANCE)
Related Audio:
America's Homeless Problem
Comments