Libertarian Book Reviews

Intermediate Text

The Inclusive Economy

By Leave a Comment

If you are like me you already have some strong opinions about poverty. And by “strong” I don’t mean your opinions are particularly loud or obnoxious, but that they are deeply-seated and fundamental to how you see the world. You might think of poverty as being a structural problem, stemming from from systemic racism and sexism. You might think it is a cultural problem, caused, in part, from fatherless homes and substance abuse. You might see it as a moral failing. You might see it as a predictable outcome of a process of globalization and consolidation in industry. These, and several other theories of poverty, arise repeatedly in contemporary debate.

Michael Tanner, Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, does us a great service by dedicating the first half of his book, The Inclusive Economy: How to Bring Wealth to America’s Poor, to a deep dive into the various historical and contemporary views on poverty. He brings data to bear on the question and essentially demonstrates that each of the various theories are incomplete or ineffective from a policy perspective. He certainly challenged some deep-seated views I’ve held on the subject, and for that I am grateful.

The second half of the book is a detailed articulation of Tanner’s policy recommendations. Tanner rejects the pessimistic view that poverty is inescapable, that the only policy discussion worth having is how to design an efficient program for redistribution. Observing that, “The best thing that government can do now, therefore, is to stop doing all the bad things it currently does,” he proposes libertarian reforms in five basic areas: criminal justice, education, zoning and land use, impediments to savings, and taxes/regulations, showing how each one would help the poor. It is a compelling argument.

As mentioned before, this is not an breezy read. If you are like me, you’ll put it down and ponder what you’ve read for a while, as your preconceptions are challenged. But it is an important book, one worth reading, and one I hope more policy-makers read as well.

Overcharged: Why Americans Pay Too Much for Health Care

By 1 Comment

I must confess.  I’m not a frequent reader of Cato Institute publications.  Many of them come off as overly-wonkish, Chamber of Commerce-approved reports.   But I had heard good things about Charles Silver’s and David A. Hyman’s new book, Overcharged: Why Americans Pay Too Much for Health Care, and decided to give it a good cover-to-cover read.   I’m glad I did.

It is easy to get angry reading this book.  I’m sure my blood pressure increased a few points as they went through their litany of examples of fraud, waste and abuse, across both public (Medicare, Medicaid ) and private insurance systems.  But it is an argument that must be made and that everyone should hear: Our system of 3rd party payers desensitizes healthcare consumers to costs and encourages over-consumption.  This is encouraged by political control over the public programs, which is captured by the healthcare industry, to maximize the amount of taxpayers dollars transferred to this sector.  The end result is the overly-costly system we have today.  It is working by design.

The solution?  The authors propose a range of approaches, from the Singaporean model of mandatory personal health savings accounts topped of by government contributions for the poor, a system of “prizes” for new drug development instead of patents, spurring market-based competition from private hospitals and clinics , domestic and international (the Surgery Center of Oklahoma and the Narayana Health Hospital in Bangalore both get props), and in general, focusing more on 1st party, individual spending for routine and predictable medical expenses, from band-aids to pregnancies,  reserving 3rd party insurance for truly unforeseen catastrophic cases.

Of course, the authors drive home the point that the “medicare for all” option, being discussed in some circles today, would just double down on failure.   I’d highly recommend this book for anyone who wants to win the argument the next time their Facebook friends spout off about the supposed virtues of such an expansion.

One last thing — The book, aside from the importance of the argument it makes, is a damn good read as well.  It is well-organized, keeps a good pace, the examples are vivid and memorable, and in general, it keeps the reader’s attention.

The Dirty Dozen

By 1 Comment

A brief note on The Dirty Dozen: How Twelve Supreme Court Cases Radically Expanded Government and Eroded Freedom.

I really had high expectations for this book, written as it was by a dream team of Cato (Robert A. Levy) and Institute for Justice (William H. Mellor) authors.  Add in a forward by Richard A. Epstein, and this book should be great.

The basic format is to take 12 issues, and for each one to examine the relevant Supreme Court decisions, asking for each one:

  • What is the Constitutional issue?
  • What were the facts?
  • Where did the Court go wrong?
  • What are the implications?

The general theme is to show how things went off the rails, how a particular Supreme Court decision, as the title suggests, “radically expanded government” or “eroded freedom.”

The book is quite readable, and will be approachable by anyone with basic knowledge of American government and our constitutional order.

The issues covered range from interstate commerce (Wickard v. Filburn) to campaign finance reform (McConnell v. Federal Election Commission) to gun rights (United States v. Miller.   These are all relevant, evergreen issues.  However, as the observant reader will no doubt notice, a lot has happened in these areas since this book was published back in 2008, like Heller and Citizens United.

As a result, much in the book is out of date.  But the approach, and execution, is brilliant.  (More, please!)  Again, I had high expectations for this book.  And now I have earnest wishes for the thorough updating this books deserves.  A new preface (added a decade ago) is not enough.