I know I bring this up all too often, but I have to ask: if Canadians actually did have better health-care, and, say, much longer lifespans, should we adopt their system?
I think there are a couple things to consider when answering that question. - Is the model sustainable, or are they just leaving future generations bankrupt?- Does it still permit sufficient innovation to make their lives even longer? - If it does both of these things, what economic principle are they relying on that we haven't discovered yet?The interview with Israel Kirzner that I posted sheds some light on the fundamental differences between mainstream academic economics vs. Mises and the more a priori type of approach. I think those differences are kind of relevant here actually.