Overheard on a Celtics online discussion board

Somebody made the point that, even if things don’t turn out all that well for Danny Ainge’s rebuilding strategy, the Boston Celtics will actually be in a pretty good position to quickly rebound back into contention. Why? Because each of the three monster contracts they’re currently paying will become extremely valuable commodities  entering their respective final years. So, if, say, Garnett doesn’t quite work out, somebody’s bound to want to unload a younger, talented player in the middle of a multi-year deal to Boston in exchange for the Ticket’s expiring contract (which comes off the cap as it expires, thereby freeing up megadollars that can be used to sign a top player).

Is it possible that Danny Ainge has gone from goat to Auerbachian genius in just a few months?

McArdle on the morality of healthcare finance

Speaking of Megan, I’ll point readers to a long and rambling post by this (usually) very excellent blogger on healthcare — a subject near and dear to all the wonkishly minded these days. It’s frankly a bit sprawling and unfocused, so I’ll just cut to the chase — namely, my reaction. And my reaction is that trying to look at the particulars of health care finance as a moral issue is tiresome in the extreme.

There’s nothing more important than considerations of moral philosophy, but something as dry and policy wonkish as health insurance should be reserved for the utilitarians.

In my view making sure everybody has robust insurance coverage via the use of taxpayer money just makes sense. It’s not necessary to talk about justice.

If the US were to enact guaranteed, universal health insurance — adapting the best practices in place throughout the rich world for use in America — the country’s wealthy would hardly be worse off, even if their taxes were to increase. If you don’t believe this, ask rich folks in Australia or Denmark whether or not they enjoy high standards of living. The wealthy can afford to pay more in taxes. When you’ve got a lot of money you can afford things.

Middle and upper middle class people don’t have much room in the family budget for higher taxes, but theirs wouldn’t have to increase very much – and in amny cases they’d come out ahead (I guarantee you some poor schmuck paying 1,400 bucks a month for COBRA coverage would be better off financially were he to pocket the premium and pay Ontario levels of taxation). And the freedom — yes, let’s call it by it’s real name — the freedom to never have to worry about losing your coverage; the freedom from job lock; the freedom to join an exciting but risky start up; the freedom from the threat of disease-induced penury; the freedom of knowing your children’s health insurance can never be canceled — the value of such freedoms would be priceless to average people.

And, the poor, of course, would come out ahead with a robust system of universal health insurance — no calculus required.

Oh, and lots of businesses would realize a net advantage, as well.

Let’s keep it simple. Leave the discussions about angels and pinheads for the philosophers. The rest of us can debate and discuss costs and benefits.

Deep thoughts

Those environmentally-friendly light bulbs are cool, I guess, and they’ll save us all money in the long run. But I’ve noticed sometimes they simply don’t fit your average lamp. Which means I’ll have to continue to buy the old fashioned variety light bulb. Ain’t no way I’m getting read of all my light fixtures just to save a planet.