Economically, fossil fuels punch above their weight because they are part of the external economy. The internal economy is the largest part of any regions economy. Its the people in the region buying and selling from each other, teachers, doctors, firemen, lawyers, merchants, nurses, real estate agents, cops, etc. Every ones money being used to pay each others salaries.
But every region imports goods and services from outside the region and unless those imports are offset by exports, then the local internal economy leaks money and the region gets poorer. In contrast if your exports bring in more money than the imports, the internal economy gains money and the region gets richer.
Health care is mostly internal economy. The federal transfers for medicare/medicaid is external money but it is a product of the amount of the population that is poor or aged. The payments slowdown the rate at which the region is getting poorer, they do not provide growth.
The only way for health care to provide growth is if it is a national heath center like the Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Fred Hutchinson Clinic. Otherwise heath care is a utility, like police/fire, or water/sewer and whatever growth it experiences comes at the expense of other sectors of the internal economy.
Excellent article by Mr Tooze, it nicely shows the interplay between politics and economics but also shows how Mr Manchin is being perfectly rational here. What the Biden administration needs to work out is how to squeeze him to get what they want, everyone has a price and what he's asking for at the moment is too much.
If Manchin ran as a Republican, his power in the Senate would be unexceptional. By being one of two swing votes who allow Schumer to be Majority Leader, he can deliver more for industry sponsors -- they still get the chair of the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources committee (Manchin himself), but they also get the cooperation of Senate Democrats on these matters.
I think Manchin's not cynically playing the cultural divide stuff for politics. I think he's sincerely on that side.
The article skims past his financial interest in the industry. It's not trivial. And a person who spends a lifetime etting rich in one mileu tends to absorb its world-view, and it sets and hardens with age.
I don't know much about the BBER but I have known some folks who studied at WVU's economics department and they are definitely a libertarian/pro-market program. So not to say their research shouldn't be trusted but I doubt they would ever recommend more government investment as a policy solution.
Do you think it's possible that the federal government is not the best or only possible vehicle for driving coal and gas out of the electricity system? Not saying there's no government spending role here, but innovation, technological change, and private sector changes might get us there before the US federal government.
Economically, fossil fuels punch above their weight because they are part of the external economy. The internal economy is the largest part of any regions economy. Its the people in the region buying and selling from each other, teachers, doctors, firemen, lawyers, merchants, nurses, real estate agents, cops, etc. Every ones money being used to pay each others salaries.
But every region imports goods and services from outside the region and unless those imports are offset by exports, then the local internal economy leaks money and the region gets poorer. In contrast if your exports bring in more money than the imports, the internal economy gains money and the region gets richer.
Health care is mostly internal economy. The federal transfers for medicare/medicaid is external money but it is a product of the amount of the population that is poor or aged. The payments slowdown the rate at which the region is getting poorer, they do not provide growth.
The only way for health care to provide growth is if it is a national heath center like the Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, Fred Hutchinson Clinic. Otherwise heath care is a utility, like police/fire, or water/sewer and whatever growth it experiences comes at the expense of other sectors of the internal economy.
Excellent article by Mr Tooze, it nicely shows the interplay between politics and economics but also shows how Mr Manchin is being perfectly rational here. What the Biden administration needs to work out is how to squeeze him to get what they want, everyone has a price and what he's asking for at the moment is too much.
If Manchin ran as a Republican, his power in the Senate would be unexceptional. By being one of two swing votes who allow Schumer to be Majority Leader, he can deliver more for industry sponsors -- they still get the chair of the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources committee (Manchin himself), but they also get the cooperation of Senate Democrats on these matters.
I think Manchin's not cynically playing the cultural divide stuff for politics. I think he's sincerely on that side.
The article skims past his financial interest in the industry. It's not trivial. And a person who spends a lifetime etting rich in one mileu tends to absorb its world-view, and it sets and hardens with age.
I don't know much about the BBER but I have known some folks who studied at WVU's economics department and they are definitely a libertarian/pro-market program. So not to say their research shouldn't be trusted but I doubt they would ever recommend more government investment as a policy solution.
Ambien uber alles.
Do you think it's possible that the federal government is not the best or only possible vehicle for driving coal and gas out of the electricity system? Not saying there's no government spending role here, but innovation, technological change, and private sector changes might get us there before the US federal government.