"Mommy, the President is drinking my chocolate milk!"

“Men in Black III” came out May 25^th of 2012, almost seven months before Barack Obama was elected president for his second time November 6^th. 

Surfing and zapping through TV channels, I´ve frequently stumbled upon Hollywood blockbuster "Men in Black III", and actually watched it for a couple of times for mere entertainment. Yesterday, I ventured into watching it for a third (or fourth) time and it surprised me with dialogues crammed with great deal of social criticism and political and economical satire. Certainly, the movie could have been a great success without those elements of criticism and spoof but, for whatever reason, (I’m thinking the sense of “making extra box-office money over viewers’ laughter” prevailed) the director and the producers chose to include such likable ingredients.

Despite their motivations, it is interesting that such explicit allusions to the past and present circumstances of politics and economics (if you watch the movie again you’ll know what I’m talking about) make it to the big screen and I believe they respond to a widespread fear that has virally infected the conscience of the American citizens and the not-so-citizens (they call them “immigrants”; some of us think of them of an important part of the labor supply of the United States of America).  People are confused and they feel that they live governed by uncertainty and inconsistency, two phenomena that work subconsciously against the interests of the rule of law and a dynamic, productive market.

"Mommy, the President is drinking my chocolate milk!”, said a young little girl in the arms of her mother, confusing “Agent ‘K’” (Will Smith) with president Obama. “And he didn’t say thank you”…  What I hear is: “Mommy, the President is taking things away from us and he is being rude!” I believe that most of us think of government just like this little girl; this administration has made decisions without transparency, righteousness or any sort of reliable and consistent criteria. And this feeling reveals itself in polls like the ones published by Gallup and the Washington Post.

President Obama’s administration has had its ups and downs like any other presidency but, in this case, hazardous characteristics have perpetrated as distinctive traits of his government: the lack of consistency in management horizontally through his collaborates, uncertainty and the erosion of trust and confidence from the American citizens and citizens and leaders from the rest of the world. I’m afraid that his administration will transcend and critically affect the next government, interrupting economic development and political efficency. Obamacare, NSA, CIA, Syria, Iran, War, Snowden, Migratory policies, Benghazi, shutdown… Stop lying! Stop saying you are sorry! Stop stealing our chocolate milk! 

Domestic insurers should be able to cover visits to overseas facilities.

In this post on how to improve the US Health Care System Robert Graboyes says

Domestic insurers should be able to cover visits to overseas facilities.

Health care can be good and cheaper in other developed countries. And health care in private clinics and hospitals can be OK and much cheaper in middle-income and even in low-income countries. For some US residents and citizens it might be a good deal to get an OK health care in a developing country than NO care at all at home, especially if local insurance covers treatment overseas. We could actually see a sort of specialization in international health care markets. For example, certain countries (even developing countries) can become specialize in some types of dental care procedures, etc.  

That has many possible implications, such as:

1) Possible price equalization in international health care markets at certain margins.

2) More incentives for the development of health clusters in developing countries.

3) A reassignment of resources in the health sector in the US.

Gifts or Bribes: Attitudes on Informal Payments in Romanian Healthcare

How do people explain their attitude towards informal payments? The study among a small group of patients seems to confirm previous findings by showing that patients pay out of fear of what might happen if he or she does not pay, or because they hope receiving better or faster treatment. Furthermore, many participants suggested that they engage in paying or offering gifts and services because they believe that due to the current state of affairs (low salaries of the medical personnel, lack of funds), there is no other way to receive the services they need. Study of participants’ attitudes suggests that they realize that offering a bribe to the medical personnel is an expression of bad mentality. Even though services are supposed to be free of charge, because they already pay insurance, participants claim that patients are not being cared for unless they or their acquaintances will offer the doctors or nurses something. They thus realise that engaging in some kind of bribing or gifting behaviour is necessary, even when it is seen as unacceptable, out of fear of not receiving (good) treatment.

That is from a paper by Andrada Moldovan and Steven Van de Walle.

Health Care in China

[In late 2012] China was home to 20 percent of the world’s population but consumed only 5 percent of total global health expenditures, filed for just 2 percent of international health patents, and was a host to only 5 percent of multi-­sited clinical trials underway in 2012.

And:

Overall, analysts predicted healthcare spending in China to grow to $1 trillion by 2020, tripling 2010 levels and comprising 7 percent of GDP. By many measures, reform and expansion of China’s health system was the largest social and economic experiment underway in the world.

That is from the new working paper "Healthcare in China: Institutional Trajectories and Future Opportunities," by Arthur A. Daemmrich (November 2012).

A table from the paper on expenditure per capita in certain countries: