[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

“I’m frustrated that the future of the American health care system rests in the hands of one or two of these unelected people who might make the decision based on political grounds,” Gruber, an M.I.T. professor, told me

Ironypalooza!

[machogirl]

The Hypocrisy and IRONY run RICH with this one.

This is what he said in his paper about the smoking tax. Good grief, the Nanny State.

(1) smokers that smoked early wished they hadn’t
(2) smokers have a self control problem

okay, but this is his response as what to do.

Given this evidence, policymakers should not be applying the standard economics model [in which people are presumed to act rationally] to smoking policy, which would imply relatively little merit for features such as warning labels. Rather, it is important to consider alternative models that incorporate the type of evidence cited above. For example, my own research shows that if you treat all smokers as standard, rational, patient, forward-looking consumers, then we should probably tax cigarettes at below $1 per pack. But if you incorporate the self-control problems noted above — not even including the failures of teens to anticipate the future — the appropriate tax rises to $5 to $10 per pack.