In the comments section, commentator “Marber” wrote the following.

There is much in our nation that is socialistic, from the hiring and paying citizens for policing, firefighting, operating city buses and trains, to the federal government paying members of the armed forces and the useless congress that takes and takes from the people and then takes some more.

This gave me reason to think about the way in which economists define different types of goods. One way in which goods are defined is whether they are “rivalrous” or not. If a good is rivalrous, it means it is a zero sum product. It can be used up and, if you are using it, I can’t. An apple is a rivalrous good. If you eat it, I can’t and when it is gone, it is gone. Your car is a rivalrous good. Your house, your computer, your clothing and most consumer goods are rivalrous goods.

Non-rivalrous goods are goods in which any number of people can use them without using them up or keeping others from using them… at least until congestion occurs. Examples of non-rivalrous goods are this website, television programs and music MP3s. Listening to Kid Rock on you iPod prevents no one else from listening to Kid Rock on his player.

Another way economists divide goods is whether or not they are “excludable.” Excludable goods are those in which you can’t use them or enjoy the benefits of them unless you have paid for them. Again, an apple is an excludable good. You have to pay for an apple to get an apple. So too with your car, your house, your computer, your clothing and everything you own. You can’t get them without paying for them.

Non-excludable goods can be used and benefited from whether they are paid for or not. Any “free rider” can use or benefit from these products without paying. Some examples are fireworks displays, lighthouses and military defense. You can use or benefit from these products and nobody can charge you a fee for doing so. You cannot be excluded.

That gives us four types of goods: 1) rivalrous/excludable, 2) rivalrous/non-excludable, 3) non-rivalrous/excludable and 4) non-rivalrous/non-excludable.

1) rivalrous/excludable (Private Goods)

Private good are those like that apple, computer, car, clothing and so forth. These are consumer goods and they are both rivalrous in that when you are using them, others can’t and excludable in that it is easy to prevent free riders. Obviously private goods are best delivered by the private sector through business and entrepreneurialism. There is no worry about free riders and the people who use the product can pay for what they use.

2) rivalrous/non-excludable (Common Goods)

Some common goods are wild fish, game, the underground aquifer and so forth. These goods are rivalrous in that there is competition for them and, if you use it all up, I can’t use it too. These goods are generally purchased by individuals from the rest of the population in the form of licenses (hunting and fishing) or regulations – well drilling restrictions. These products are managed by government and should be paid for with fees by those who use them. When common goods are not properly managed, people have the incentive to use as much of the good as they can resulting in the “tragedy of the commons.” Fish get depleted, game gets hunted to extinction and aquifers are pumped dry.

3) non-rivalrous/excludable (Club Goods)

Club goods are virtually unlimited and, therefore, non-rivalrous. They are, however, excludable. Examples include satellite television, copyrighted music recordings and intellectual property. No matter how many people use these items, there is more available and your experience isn’t diminished. They can be, however, be sold to end users and, therefore, are excludable.

All three of the above products – private goods, common goods and club goods have one thing in common: the person or group who uses them can and should pay for what he uses. Whether it is a private good like an apple, a common good like wild fish, or a club good like satellite television, the costs should be paid by the end user who benefits from its use. The end user can decide whether he wants to pay by deciding whether or not he wants to buy. It is up to him. The fourth type of good is a little different.

4) non-rivalrous/non-excludable (Public Goods)

Public goods can be used by may people without any diminishment of quality of experience so they are non-rivalrous. Additionally, they cannot be charged back to the end-user directly because there is no way to prevent free riders. The classic example of a public good is the lighthouse. It doesn’t matter if a lighthouse prevents one ship or a hundred from hitting the rocks, the benefit is not diminished for any ship. Furthermore, there is no way to charge a ship owner for the benefit of seeing the light and not running into the rocks. It is perfectly non-excludable. Other examples of public goods are military protection, law enforcement and public safety.

Most people, even libertarians, believe public goods are best paid for with public funds for the general benefit of society. It is impractical to charge end user fees and it is impossible to prevent fee riders. Unlike the other three types of goods, these should be paid for with tax dollars, not because it is the most equitable or fair way, but because it is the only way. Some will benefit from public goods much more than they contribute, others will contribute far more than their share. It is unfair, but it is a necessary evil.

So what is health care? Health care is rivalrous. When a doctor is using his equipment, facility and time on your care, they cannot be used for the care of others. Health care is also easily excludable. There need be no free-riders in health care. It is easy to charge end users and deny care to those who do not pay. Health care, therefore, is a private good. It is best provided by the private sector and charged as a fee to end users.

Obamacare treats health care like a public good; which it most certainly is not. Obama plans to take a good perfectly suited for fair distribution by the private sector and re-engineer it for unfair distribution as a faux public good. This is redistributive and it is, by definition, socialism.

Public funding of military protection, law enforcement and lighthouses is essentially redistributive but, since there is really no other way to provide them, the unfairness can be excused. There is no excuse for the massive redistribution of wealth that will be Obamacare. The reason for its existence is that it fits the socialist vision of this president.

Share on Facebook