Comments on: The Magic “M” Word http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/ Looking Forward to Freedom Wed, 08 Feb 2012 09:58:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Charlie http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-3918 Charlie Fri, 05 Feb 2010 17:11:56 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-3918 Mutualism, with its anarchist roots, is potentially a very radical policy for mainstream politics. It'll be really interesting to see how far the politicians are willing to take the idea. Unfortunately I suspect once they are in power that the temptation to privatise things instead of mutualising them will be too powerful for the Tories. I'm sure a lot of the Tory supporters are counting on a raft of privatisations. Mutualism, with its anarchist roots, is potentially a very radical policy for mainstream politics. It’ll be really interesting to see how far the politicians are willing to take the idea. Unfortunately I suspect once they are in power that the temptation to privatise things instead of mutualising them will be too powerful for the Tories. I’m sure a lot of the Tory supporters are counting on a raft of privatisations.

]]> By: Niklas Smith http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2920 Niklas Smith Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:35:32 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2920 There's an interesting blog post on ResPublica and the free market here: http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2009/12/philip-booth.html Even if you think Mr Blond is too anti-market (I'm reserving judgement until I've actually read some of the think-tank's ideas in more detail), you can still support some of his good ideas. There’s an interesting blog post on ResPublica and the free market here: http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2009/12/philip-booth.html

Even if you think Mr Blond is too anti-market (I’m reserving judgement until I’ve actually read some of the think-tank’s ideas in more detail), you can still support some of his good ideas.

]]> By: Sara Scarlett http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2919 Sara Scarlett Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:05:56 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2919 Yes, I read the whole document and it's excellent. Some of Phillip Blond's views are eccentric but I have a great deal of time for him. What he is suggesting is that the state shouldn't have the monopoly of the provision of welfare and that's a good thing. Yes, I read the whole document and it’s excellent. Some of Phillip Blond’s views are eccentric but I have a great deal of time for him. What he is suggesting is that the state shouldn’t have the monopoly of the provision of welfare and that’s a good thing.

]]> By: Geoff Payne http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2918 Geoff Payne Tue, 22 Dec 2009 15:58:27 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2918 I am perfectly happy that Nick Clegg takes an interest in this think tank, but you may not be. Did you read the following in the introduction? --------------------------------- "Market versus statist thinking is a crude false dichotomy, based on an ideologically gloomy vision of human nature which has led both sectors into today’s cul-desac – a nightmare treadmill where every problem thrown up by a dysfunctional system can only be addressed by prescribing larger doses of the treatment that got us into the mess in the first place. The management model that has come to dominate all the airwaves, from the A-grade journals that shape the academic research agenda to the management consultants and eminent advisers who influence government policy, and (unbeknown to many of them) the practical managers who have absorbed it because it is ‘in the air’, is the neo-liberalism of the Chicago School economists whose line of descent goes back to the radical individualism of Smith (of the Wealth of Nations rather than Moral Sentiments), Hume, Locke and Bentham. Before he died, Milton Friedman consoled himself for (he judged) Chicago’s relatively small influence on economic practice with the knowledge that: “Judged by ideas, we have been on the winning side”. He was right. Almost all the social sciences – sociology, law and social psychology as well as economics – have been colonised by Chicago economics. This is especially true of management, which in its efforts to be recognised as a real science has been as consumed by economics envy as economics has by that of hard physics, to its enormous detriment." I am perfectly happy that Nick Clegg takes an interest in this think tank, but you may not be.
Did you read the following in the introduction?
———————————
“Market versus statist thinking is a crude
false dichotomy, based on an ideologically
gloomy vision of human nature which
has led both sectors into today’s cul-desac
– a nightmare treadmill where every
problem thrown up by a dysfunctional
system can only be addressed by
prescribing larger doses of the treatment
that got us into the mess in the first
place.
The management model that has
come to dominate all the airwaves,
from the A-grade journals that shape
the academic research agenda to the
management consultants and eminent
advisers who influence government
policy, and (unbeknown to many of
them) the practical managers who have
absorbed it because it is ‘in the air’,
is the neo-liberalism of the Chicago
School economists whose line of descent
goes back to the radical individualism
of Smith (of the Wealth of Nations
rather than Moral Sentiments), Hume,
Locke and Bentham. Before he died,
Milton Friedman consoled himself for
(he judged) Chicago’s relatively small
influence on economic practice with the
knowledge that: “Judged by ideas, we
have been on the winning side”. He was
right. Almost all the social sciences –
sociology, law and social psychology as
well as economics – have been colonised
by Chicago economics. This is especially
true of management, which in its efforts
to be recognised as a real science has
been as consumed by economics envy as
economics has by that of hard physics, to
its enormous detriment.”

]]> By: Niklas Smith http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2917 Niklas Smith Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:11:39 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2917 <i>It is strange the the Cooperative Party is pretty much a wing of the Labour Party...</i> Indeed. Apparently the Cooperative Party was founded out of anger at the Liberal (then Coalition) government during WW1, whose wartime economic and rationing policies hurt the co-operative movement. Then they decided to effectively join the Labour Party about the same time as the Fabians became dominant there. Talk about going from the frying pan into the fire! That said, I don't think all welfare can be effectively delivered just by mutual self-help; there is a strong case for tax funding of healthcare and education. But the funds should be spent as far as possible by mutuals accountable to their members (i.e. taxpayers control the spending of taxpayers' money), and individuals should have as much choice as is feasible in how it is spent. It is strange the the Cooperative Party is pretty much a wing of the Labour Party…

Indeed. Apparently the Cooperative Party was founded out of anger at the Liberal (then Coalition) government during WW1, whose wartime economic and rationing policies hurt the co-operative movement. Then they decided to effectively join the Labour Party about the same time as the Fabians became dominant there. Talk about going from the frying pan into the fire!

That said, I don’t think all welfare can be effectively delivered just by mutual self-help; there is a strong case for tax funding of healthcare and education. But the funds should be spent as far as possible by mutuals accountable to their members (i.e. taxpayers control the spending of taxpayers’ money), and individuals should have as much choice as is feasible in how it is spent.

]]> By: Tristan http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2914 Tristan Mon, 21 Dec 2009 22:54:55 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2914 It is strange the the Cooperative Party is pretty much a wing of the Labour Party, which happens to be the party which did most to destroy the cooperative and voluntary aid movement with the welfare state. Libertarians have long advocated voluntary and mutual organisation, especially those on the 'left' but increasingly those on the 'right' who realise that both community and the opportunity for individual excellence is founded upon such institutions. For the LibDems, in theory the cooperative movement should fit in firmly with the stated ideals of the party, but ideals and policy often diverge massively. It is strange the the Cooperative Party is pretty much a wing of the Labour Party, which happens to be the party which did most to destroy the cooperative and voluntary aid movement with the welfare state.

Libertarians have long advocated voluntary and mutual organisation, especially those on the ‘left’ but increasingly those on the ‘right’ who realise that both community and the opportunity for individual excellence is founded upon such institutions.

For the LibDems, in theory the cooperative movement should fit in firmly with the stated ideals of the party, but ideals and policy often diverge massively.

]]> By: Niklas Smith http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2900 Niklas Smith Mon, 21 Dec 2009 12:25:53 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2900 <i>Is productivity higher in other systems? That would be interesting to know.</i> Yes, it would be very useful. The problem is, of course, that measuring productivity of healthcare is rather difficult. But the NHS seems to be middling in the European context when it comes to service to patients - 14th out of 33 countries in the latest <a href="http://www.healthpowerhouse.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=36&Itemid=55" title="Euro Health Consumer Index" rel="nofollow">Euro Health Consumer Index</a>. The top country is the Netherlands (for the second year running), which jumped to the top part of the table after reforming healthcare in a market-friendly direction (though with insurance being compulsory, with a risk pool and public subsidy). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands The second country was Denmark, which operates a "single payer" system, funded by local taxation (to my knowledge) and strongly devolved compared with the NHS. I think the Dutch reforms deserve serious consideration, especially if tweaked so that the commissioning of healthcare is managed by mutuals like friendly societies. To me this is a logical extension of the existing Lib Dem policy of devolving spending decisions to locally-elected boards. Is productivity higher in other systems? That would be interesting to know.

Yes, it would be very useful. The problem is, of course, that measuring productivity of healthcare is rather difficult.

But the NHS seems to be middling in the European context when it comes to service to patients – 14th out of 33 countries in the latest Euro Health Consumer Index. The top country is the Netherlands (for the second year running), which jumped to the top part of the table after reforming healthcare in a market-friendly direction (though with insurance being compulsory, with a risk pool and public subsidy). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_the_Netherlands

The second country was Denmark, which operates a “single payer” system, funded by local taxation (to my knowledge) and strongly devolved compared with the NHS.

I think the Dutch reforms deserve serious consideration, especially if tweaked so that the commissioning of healthcare is managed by mutuals like friendly societies. To me this is a logical extension of the existing Lib Dem policy of devolving spending decisions to locally-elected boards.

]]> By: tim leunig http://www.liberal-vision.org/2009/12/21/the-magic-m-word/comment-page-1/#comment-2897 tim leunig Mon, 21 Dec 2009 10:58:56 +0000 http://www.liberal-vision.org/?p=4020#comment-2897 You would expect measured NHS productivity to fall as inputs increase because of the way in which it is measured. In general, output is a "completed clinician episode" - i.e. it doesn't matter if you live or die. So if the doc spends more time with you, and you live, measured productivity has fallen. Equally, if care improves, by say not discharging patients before they are ready to be discharged, measured productivity will fall. Is productivity higher in other systems? That would be interesting to know. You would expect measured NHS productivity to fall as inputs increase because of the way in which it is measured. In general, output is a “completed clinician episode” – i.e. it doesn’t matter if you live or die. So if the doc spends more time with you, and you live, measured productivity has fallen. Equally, if care improves, by say not discharging patients before they are ready to be discharged, measured productivity will fall.

Is productivity higher in other systems? That would be interesting to know.

]]>