If the Democrats are going to pass that steaming pile of Health Care interference, then I’m leaving the country.

Actually, I had a vacation scheduled for next week anyway. I’ll be back.

I have little doubt that this “reform” will inhibit innovation in so many areas related to health care (oh, and liberty) enough to make the actual costs many times higher than the benefits. Some people were saying that not passing it would cause many extra deaths, but I’m pretty confident that passing it will.

Maybe, some day, it will be repealed (or never even passed). But, that doesn’t seem to be the way to bet.

I was going to write a post responding to the widespread complaints (largely against the Senate filibuster) that the government is broken, because a majority party can’t always get what it wants.

Fortunately, Will Wilkinson already wrote it.

Key excerpt:

From this perspective, the fact that a party decidedly but temporarily in the minority is able to defeat a measure that would have profound, long-term effects on the basic structure of the United States’ institutions is very good evidence that the system works!

What scares me is what will happen after some Republican gains, and the proposals get more “moderate”, and government starts “working.”

This morning, I listened to this Cato Podcast featuring gay British MP Nick Herbert, discussing the benefits of the recent changes in the Conservative Party towards equal rights for gay people in the UK. I was very impressed.

As a libertarian, I’ve never thought that it was proper for the government to favor or disfavor people because of their sexual orientation. And, just as a modern, sensible (I hope) person, I find prejudice against gay people to be stupid and repulsive.

Also, as a purely practical, strategic, political matter, I think that conservatives in general and the Republican Party in particular would be wise to heed Herbert’s call and stop supporting anti-gay public policy measures. Young people are overwhelmingly more tolerant of differences in sexual orientation than their elders, and will be likely to oppose the groups that they find hateful and backwardly stupid. The demographic trend is away from supporters of such policies.

You don’t have to find the behavior personally appealing, but to promote legal sanctions against those who do is irrational on many levels.

I’m experimenting with a new web host. Things will probably be broken occasionally while I try things out. I appreciate your patience. Re-using this post to test posting from a new computer…

This is a bit late, but if you haven’t seen it yet, you should definitely check out the Hayek vs. Keynes “Fear the Boom and Bust” rap video currently on the home page of econstories.tv.

It might be a little too econ-geeky for many, but it seems like a fun way to exhibit good information about a serious debate that’s still with us.

Enjoy!

I often think it’s strange that we let calendars have a huge impact on when we choose to reflect and anticipate things. Why New Years and not other times? Why should the fact that the year number is a multiple of ten make us review and anticipate over longer ranges?

But, then I think: “Why not?” We often get so bogged down in the details of daily life that we lose perspective and fail to examine what’s happened or plan for the future as much as we should. So, the changing of the year, and the decade, seems like as good an excuse as any to trigger this healthy behavior. And, if a shared calendar helps us coordinate these efforts and generate better answers, so much the better.

I know that 2009 was a difficult year for many. But, I’m still optimistic for the long term. And, I have a new nephew!

I have little confidence in governments to solve problems, but I have a lot of confidence in lots of people sharing ideas and experience to do so.

So, while I have no idea what 2010 will bring us, I still think things will continue to get better and better (with occasional setbacks).

Have a great year.