Obama didn't get his Nobel for economics

Something seems to have escaped the notice of the media during the events in Oslo, and that is that the Nobel Committee did not give President Obama the Nobel Prize in economics, and with the un-employment rate over 10% and a national debt over $12 trillion it is no wonder.

The Nobel Committee did award the Prize for economics to two American economists, Elinor Ostrom, and Oliver E. Williamson. Both of these scholars devoted their studies to certain effects on free market economics.
Dr. Ostrom identified rules for successful outcomes in competitive markets which challenges the belief that the only solution to economic problems is nationalization.

Dr. Williamson's work focused on competitive markets. He concluded that free markets work relatively well because buyers and sellers can turn to other trading partners in case of dissent.

These two Nobel Prize wining economist obviously have not been asked to assist with the so-called Healthcare Reform bill. The two free market premises stated here represent the best workable alternative to the supposed reform of the healthcare insurance system.

At this point in time none of us can buy health insurance across state lines. This limits the number of options that Dr. Williamson identifies as being so effective in free markets. The current debate does not call for a lifting of those restrictions but instead proposes that nationalization is the best course of action. This runs completely contrary to the published studies by Dr. Ostrom.

So why does Washington want to go that way? Because it's not about health, care it's about the money. By calling the debate "healthcare reform" as opposed to health insurance nationalization, the advocates have disguised this money grab as some sort of compassionate humanitarian effort instead of a sophisticated bank job. It's all about the money. Money and power are interchangeable commodities in Washington with one begetting the other. So it is no surprise that Washington wants to handle your money for you. Do you trust them to do that? How well have they done with Social Security?

The best solution to achieve a successful outcome for healthcare is to follow the work of these two Nobel Laureates, and allow the free market to expand so that market forces will provide the needed adjustments to accommodate the needs of the country.

This seems so simple to understand but perhaps this is beyond the grasp of President Obama. However, we must remember he did not win his Nobel Prize in economics did he?


Something seems to have escaped the notice of the media during the events in Oslo, and that is that the Nobel Committee did not give President Obama the Nobel Prize in economics, and with the un-employment rate over 10% and a national debt over $12 trillion it is no wonder.

The Nobel Committee did award the Prize for economics to two American economists, Elinor Ostrom, and Oliver E. Williamson. Both of these scholars devoted their studies to certain effects on free market economics.

Dr. Ostrom identified rules for successful outcomes in competitive markets which challenges the belief that the only solution to economic problems is nationalization.

Dr. Williamson's work focused on competitive markets. He concluded that free markets work relatively well because buyers and sellers can turn to other trading partners in case of dissent.

These two Nobel Prize wining economist obviously have not been asked to assist with the so-called Healthcare Reform bill. The two free market premises stated here represent the best workable alternative to the supposed reform of the healthcare insurance system.

At this point in time none of us can buy health insurance across state lines. This limits the number of options that Dr. Williamson identifies as being so effective in free markets. The current debate does not call for a lifting of those restrictions but instead proposes that nationalization is the best course of action. This runs completely contrary to the published studies by Dr. Ostrom.

So why does Washington want to go that way? Because it's not about health, care it's about the money. By calling the debate "healthcare reform" as opposed to health insurance nationalization, the advocates have disguised this money grab as some sort of compassionate humanitarian effort instead of a sophisticated bank job. It's all about the money. Money and power are interchangeable commodities in Washington with one begetting the other. So it is no surprise that Washington wants to handle your money for you. Do you trust them to do that? How well have they done with Social Security?

The best solution to achieve a successful outcome for healthcare is to follow the work of these two Nobel Laureates, and allow the free market to expand so that market forces will provide the needed adjustments to accommodate the needs of the country.

This seems so simple to understand but perhaps this is beyond the grasp of President Obama. However, we must remember he did not win his Nobel Prize in economics did he?


RECENT VIDEOS