worse thing you would do to be rich

[brooklynguy]

FYI, today's NY Times has an article by Robert Shiller that is directly relevant to the "free market" debate that developed in this thread.  Shiller argues that market-intervening regulation is needed not only to prevent "externalities" (like a business deciding to pollute the air in the course of manufacturing its products) from interfering with a market's achievement of optimal outcomes, but also because market-incentivized manipulation and deception are a fundamental problem inherent in free markets composed of human actors.

The article has some strong mustachian undercurrents, with tidbits like this:

People in free markets do not really manage to maximize what the philosopher Jeremy Bentham would call their utility. They don’t always succeed in maximizing their true welfare, but something else, something much more limited.

In 1918, Irving Fisher, the Yale economist, argued that what people maximize in their actions is something that could better be described as ''wantability" rather than utility, for they are subject to temptation and mistakes in the vast array of purchases they make, leading profit-maximizing marketers to take advantage of them on a systematic basis.

Link:  Faith in an Unregulated Market?  Don't Fall for It

(The article is a nutshell summary of the new book Shiller co-authored with Georrge Akerlof, "Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulation and Deception")

[Landlord2015]

FYI, today's NY Times has an article by Robert Shiller that is directly relevant to the "free market" debate that developed in this thread.  Shiller argues that market-intervening regulation is needed not only to prevent "externalities" (like a business deciding to pollute the air in the course of manufacturing its products) from interfering with a market's achievement of optimal outcomes, but also because market-incentivized manipulation and deception are a fundamental problem inherent in free markets composed of human actors.

The article has some strong mustachian undercurrents, with tidbits like this:

People in free markets do not really manage to maximize what the philosopher Jeremy Bentham would call their utility. They don’t always succeed in maximizing their true welfare, but something else, something much more limited.

In 1918, Irving Fisher, the Yale economist, argued that what people maximize in their actions is something that could better be described as ''wantability" rather than utility, for they are subject to temptation and mistakes in the vast array of purchases they make, leading profit-maximizing marketers to take advantage of them on a systematic basis.

Link:  Faith in an Unregulated Market?  Don't Fall for It

(The article is a nutshell summary of the new book Shiller co-authored with Georrge Akerlof, "Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulation and Deception")

Yeah right if I can take money from renters who fall in my legal trap of fixed term contract and then those phools try oddly fairly often to break the fixed term contract in advance only to realize it is not free and it costs them lot of money.

My country has lately stupidly taken a swarm of refugees. They have and I have not and I rent exactly to who I want! Don't get me wrong I do rent happily to say people who adapt work full time say a renter from example USA is very welcome to become my renter.

My point being I am not an angel and lets face it many mustachians are bad as.
Your talented professor also warns that some morals should still be upheld in a free market.

There is greed and there is greed. In this extreme case condemning people to die because they can not pay for the extremely expensive medicine that is not something I would be willing to do. That is evil and not simply normal greed.

[ConorM]

A uniquely terrible US healthcare system?  Really?  It might not be perfect but people travel from around the world to come here to get the best healthcare available.  If I get sick, I would prefer to do it on U.S. soil.

But - I agree.  This guy is a real jerk.  There are lots of real jerks out there in all industries that just want to make money.  There are many in our healthcare system that do actually care and not just for the money.

Interesting. I got appendicitis in college 4 years ago. Total cost was somewhere slightly above $5k if I remember correctly with whatever insurance my school provided. You might've seen the similar concept (I think it was a reddit post with healthcare in Spain?), but I could have just taken a flight home where I am not a citizen (home is Korea, with US citizenship), received higher quality surgery (I would've gotten a tiny 1cm diameter hole instead of a 3 inch slit with permanent scarring, it would've also been less painful from what I remember due to the better procedure), chilled in korea for a few days due to faster recovery, taken a flight back to america, and come out with more savings.

My understanding of healthcare in korea is that government pays for 50% of any medical procedure, regardless of income. Trips to the doctor for a cold are $30 ($60 total cost for the visit). I'm not saying its the best scenario, Healthcare in Korea isn't perfect either. Obviously, this can cause problems for homeless people who need expensive procedures.

For the record, agree that the guy is a jerk.

And for the same appendicitis in Australia you would likely have had the same keyhole surgery in a public hospital and be sent on your way with no bill to pay.... Universal healthcare is a great thing in this country.