Diplomatic email

A good friend of mine is citing several examples of massive government programs that were supposedly meant to help and are shown to be grossly inefficient; this is to show that the US government is not equipped in any way to succeed with its health care plan and it should not compete with private industry. Since responding to such an email statement is a tricky endeavor, I've tried to do my very best to convince and not alienate. Here's how I've responded:

This interesting debate has to be seen in terms of which private sector enterprises are efficient and which aren't.
If we begin with what's super efficient in terms of value delivered to consumers, the internet and all its by-products from news, email, search tools, video and sound delivery plus on-line shopping stands as the best example. Another area is air transportation and accommodations where price transparency and abundant supply are a boon to travelers. For years, consumer products have in fact led the way as globalization, extensive distribution, open competition and use of technology have helped consumers getting consistent great deals.

Remarkably, what remains inefficient isn't so much what's heavily regulated, but what is staunchly protected by industries seeking monopoly status through heavy lobbying tactics and deep political infiltration. Our health care system stands as a blatant example (17% of GDP spending vs. less than 10% for similar developed countries offering better outcomes) and shows that countless interests are lining up their pockets (insurance and big pharma stand as the prime suspects as they're funneling tons of money to our politician...)

The same holds true with financial institutions and credit card companies that control Capitol Hill, real estate where there's no market transparency and where a whopping 6% commission is still required for a sliver of service, where unlimited mortgage deductions are subsidizing the entire industry through its powerful lobby. Telecoms are another bad example, where bundled services like broadband, cable TV and voice over IP can be obtained for one third of the price in some European countries. All this to say that big business de-facto control on government, to protect itself against open competition, is generally always bad.

However, I do agree that government bailouts and subsidies don't work; like the ones given to AIG, City Corp, GM and Chrysler, but also to the farm industry. The military-industrial complex has also been a leach on our treasury for years. Finally, there are many other insidious inequities like religious tax deductions or lavish corporate perks that all contribute to unfairly increasing our individual tax burden.

What's needed is a deep and true electoral system reform capable of chasing lobbyists out of Washington and keeping Congress and politicians on their toes. A good tax reform (read major simplification, with far less loopholes) wouldn't be bad either...