Comments on: Vaccine Shortage http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html where orders emerge Mon, 16 Jan 2012 02:06:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-188315 Anonymous Sun, 01 Nov 2009 03:09:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-188315 I finally read the article and regularly I really wouldn't worry so much about the flu. Mostly, I was concerned about getting any form of the flu because I am pregnant. I got my regular flu shot, and I would worry less but I also work helping customers all day in a sales type job. The other reason I would like to get it is that my doctor told me to. All in all, reading the article was interesting and does raise questions about the vaccine, but I am trying to not take such risks with my health right now. Basically, I don't want to take the chance of getting very ill and dying. I finally read the article and regularly I really wouldn’t worry so much about the flu. Mostly, I was concerned about getting any form of the flu because I am pregnant. I got my regular flu shot, and I would worry less but I also work helping customers all day in a sales type job. The other reason I would like to get it is that my doctor told me to.
All in all, reading the article was interesting and does raise questions about the vaccine, but I am trying to not take such risks with my health right now. Basically, I don’t want to take the chance of getting very ill and dying.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187691 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:36:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187691 Right. It makes much more sense than your assumption that "not well correlated" means "not correlated" or "a correlation of zero". I'm simply arguing for the generally accepted difference between "not well" and "not at all". I'm not sure why you have such a problem with that. Right.

It makes much more sense than your assumption that “not well correlated” means “not correlated” or “a correlation of zero”.

I’m simply arguing for the generally accepted difference between “not well” and “not at all”. I’m not sure why you have such a problem with that.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187690 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:36:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187690 Right. It makes much more sense than your assumption that "not well correlated" means "not correlated" or "a correlation of zero". I'm simply arguing for the generally accepted difference between "not well" and "not at all". I'm not sure why you have such a problem with that. Right.

It makes much more sense than your assumption that “not well correlated” means “not correlated” or “a correlation of zero”.

I’m simply arguing for the generally accepted difference between “not well” and “not at all”. I’m not sure why you have such a problem with that.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187689 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:33:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187689 You can bet the owner of the store targeted you, yes. You're not going to see much bacon sold in Tel Aviv, and you won't find a hamburger in Mumbai. The fact is you want to paint everyone that disagrees with you as an advocate of Big Government, but I'm sorry - that's not inherent in what I say. I'm sure I do have a different view of the role of the state than you - certainly on this particular issue of vaccination. But that doesn't change the fact that you were targeted, and it has nothing to do with the government. I'm glad you got a chicken sandwich and I'd be glad if daycare workers got vaccinations. My concern is with the question of why and when that doesn't happen (because we know why it does happen when it does - Adam Smith and others figured that out hundreds of years ago... nothing particularly interesting in understanding why things work when they work right). You can bet the owner of the store targeted you, yes. You’re not going to see much bacon sold in Tel Aviv, and you won’t find a hamburger in Mumbai. The fact is you want to paint everyone that disagrees with you as an advocate of Big Government, but I’m sorry – that’s not inherent in what I say. I’m sure I do have a different view of the role of the state than you – certainly on this particular issue of vaccination. But that doesn’t change the fact that you were targeted, and it has nothing to do with the government. I’m glad you got a chicken sandwich and I’d be glad if daycare workers got vaccinations. My concern is with the question of why and when that doesn’t happen (because we know why it does happen when it does – Adam Smith and others figured that out hundreds of years ago… nothing particularly interesting in understanding why things work when they work right).

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187688 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:33:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187688 You can bet the owner of the store targeted you, yes. You're not going to see much bacon sold in Tel Aviv, and you won't find a hamburger in Mumbai. The fact is you want to paint everyone that disagrees with you as an advocate of Big Government, but I'm sorry - that's not inherent in what I say. I'm sure I do have a different view of the role of the state than you - certainly on this particular issue of vaccination. But that doesn't change the fact that you were targeted, and it has nothing to do with the government. I'm glad you got a chicken sandwich and I'd be glad if daycare workers got vaccinations. My concern is with the question of why and when that doesn't happen (because we know why it does happen when it does - Adam Smith and others figured that out hundreds of years ago... nothing particularly interesting in understanding why things work when they work right). You can bet the owner of the store targeted you, yes. You’re not going to see much bacon sold in Tel Aviv, and you won’t find a hamburger in Mumbai. The fact is you want to paint everyone that disagrees with you as an advocate of Big Government, but I’m sorry – that’s not inherent in what I say. I’m sure I do have a different view of the role of the state than you – certainly on this particular issue of vaccination. But that doesn’t change the fact that you were targeted, and it has nothing to do with the government. I’m glad you got a chicken sandwich and I’d be glad if daycare workers got vaccinations. My concern is with the question of why and when that doesn’t happen (because we know why it does happen when it does – Adam Smith and others figured that out hundreds of years ago… nothing particularly interesting in understanding why things work when they work right).

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187685 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:27:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187685 I suppose it's not unreasonable, but I'm not sure why you would just assume that I mean not statistically significant from zero. Even if we presuppose that all correlations are statistically significant from zero, the correlation itself can still vary. I'm not putting hard limits on what is "high" and what is "low". I wasn't even really speaking in such strict statistical terms - I was speaking more colloquially (although expressing it in statistical terms works too). Let's take a correlation of vulnerability to the flu and willingness to buy of 0.1, and let's say it's statistically significant. I would call that "not well correlated". That doesn't mean I'm saying that there is no relationship between the two. There is one. It's just not a particularly important one. I'm not sure why you dragged statistical significance into this. I'm perfectly willing to stipulate that all these correlations are significant - despite the fact that I wasn't speaking so formally in the first place. I suppose it’s not unreasonable, but I’m not sure why you would just assume that I mean not statistically significant from zero. Even if we presuppose that all correlations are statistically significant from zero, the correlation itself can still vary. I’m not putting hard limits on what is “high” and what is “low”. I wasn’t even really speaking in such strict statistical terms – I was speaking more colloquially (although expressing it in statistical terms works too).

Let’s take a correlation of vulnerability to the flu and willingness to buy of 0.1, and let’s say it’s statistically significant. I would call that “not well correlated”. That doesn’t mean I’m saying that there is no relationship between the two. There is one. It’s just not a particularly important one.

I’m not sure why you dragged statistical significance into this. I’m perfectly willing to stipulate that all these correlations are significant – despite the fact that I wasn’t speaking so formally in the first place.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187684 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:27:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187684 I suppose it's not unreasonable, but I'm not sure why you would just assume that I mean not statistically significant from zero. Even if we presuppose that all correlations are statistically significant from zero, the correlation itself can still vary. I'm not putting hard limits on what is "high" and what is "low". I wasn't even really speaking in such strict statistical terms - I was speaking more colloquially (although expressing it in statistical terms works too). Let's take a correlation of vulnerability to the flu and willingness to buy of 0.1, and let's say it's statistically significant. I would call that "not well correlated". That doesn't mean I'm saying that there is no relationship between the two. There is one. It's just not a particularly important one. I'm not sure why you dragged statistical significance into this. I'm perfectly willing to stipulate that all these correlations are significant - despite the fact that I wasn't speaking so formally in the first place. I suppose it’s not unreasonable, but I’m not sure why you would just assume that I mean not statistically significant from zero. Even if we presuppose that all correlations are statistically significant from zero, the correlation itself can still vary. I’m not putting hard limits on what is “high” and what is “low”. I wasn’t even really speaking in such strict statistical terms – I was speaking more colloquially (although expressing it in statistical terms works too).

Let’s take a correlation of vulnerability to the flu and willingness to buy of 0.1, and let’s say it’s statistically significant. I would call that “not well correlated”. That doesn’t mean I’m saying that there is no relationship between the two. There is one. It’s just not a particularly important one.

I’m not sure why you dragged statistical significance into this. I’m perfectly willing to stipulate that all these correlations are significant – despite the fact that I wasn’t speaking so formally in the first place.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187682 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:22:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187682 Sorry. I made a mistake. "Not well correlated" means a correlation that is PROBABLY greater than 0 and less than some unspecified value that itself is less than 1. Now I've got it. Sorry. I made a mistake. “Not well correlated” means a correlation that is PROBABLY greater than 0 and less than some unspecified value that itself is less than 1. Now I’ve got it.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187683 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:22:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187683 Sorry. I made a mistake. "Not well correlated" means a correlation that is PROBABLY greater than 0 and less than some unspecified value that itself is less than 1. Now I've got it. Sorry. I made a mistake. “Not well correlated” means a correlation that is PROBABLY greater than 0 and less than some unspecified value that itself is less than 1. Now I’ve got it.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187676 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:18:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187676 I just drove to a local restaurant and ate a chicken sandwich. Was I "targeted" for consumption of that sandwich? I just drove to a local restaurant and ate a chicken sandwich. Was I “targeted” for consumption of that sandwich?

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187677 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:18:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187677 I just drove to a local restaurant and ate a chicken sandwich. Was I "targeted" for consumption of that sandwich? I just drove to a local restaurant and ate a chicken sandwich. Was I “targeted” for consumption of that sandwich?

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187674 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:09:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187674 My (perfectly reasonable) interpretation of "not well correlated" is that the derived correlation coefficient is not statistically different from zero. Your interpretation is that it is not clearly zero, and it is not something else called "highly correlated", which is not defined, but which must be less than or equal to 1. So "not well correlated" to you means a correlation greater than 0 and less than 1 . It's all so obvious now! My (perfectly reasonable) interpretation of “not well correlated” is that the derived correlation coefficient is not statistically different from zero. Your interpretation is that it is not clearly zero, and it is not something else called “highly correlated”, which is not defined, but which must be less than or equal to 1. So “not well correlated” to you means a correlation greater than 0 and less than 1 . It’s all so obvious now!

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187675 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:09:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187675 My (perfectly reasonable) interpretation of "not well correlated" is that the derived correlation coefficient is not statistically different from zero. Your interpretation is that it is not clearly zero, and it is not something else called "highly correlated", which is not defined, but which must be less than or equal to 1. So "not well correlated" to you means a correlation greater than 0 and less than 1 . It's all so obvious now! My (perfectly reasonable) interpretation of “not well correlated” is that the derived correlation coefficient is not statistically different from zero. Your interpretation is that it is not clearly zero, and it is not something else called “highly correlated”, which is not defined, but which must be less than or equal to 1. So “not well correlated” to you means a correlation greater than 0 and less than 1 . It’s all so obvious now!

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187665 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:00:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187665 Selling at a day care center targets people who would get a great deal of use out of it. I don't recall saying anything about government in agreeing with you on this point. I'm sure we have other disagreements on the role of government, but not that selling at a daycare center would be a bad idea. The question is - why isn't it being sold at the day care center? My place of employment (not a daycare center!) is selling the flu vaccine. Not all places of employment are. Why not? Could it be that ability to pay isn't well correlated with need? But insofar as it is being sold at daycare centers, I strongly agree that that's good. I'm not sure why you think I'm saying that involves government. Selling at a day care center targets people who would get a great deal of use out of it. I don’t recall saying anything about government in agreeing with you on this point.

I’m sure we have other disagreements on the role of government, but not that selling at a daycare center would be a bad idea.

The question is – why isn’t it being sold at the day care center? My place of employment (not a daycare center!) is selling the flu vaccine. Not all places of employment are. Why not? Could it be that ability to pay isn’t well correlated with need?

But insofar as it is being sold at daycare centers, I strongly agree that that’s good. I’m not sure why you think I’m saying that involves government.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187664 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:00:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187664 Selling at a day care center targets people who would get a great deal of use out of it. I don't recall saying anything about government in agreeing with you on this point. I'm sure we have other disagreements on the role of government, but not that selling at a daycare center would be a bad idea. The question is - why isn't it being sold at the day care center? My place of employment (not a daycare center!) is selling the flu vaccine. Not all places of employment are. Why not? Could it be that ability to pay isn't well correlated with need? But insofar as it is being sold at daycare centers, I strongly agree that that's good. I'm not sure why you think I'm saying that involves government. Selling at a day care center targets people who would get a great deal of use out of it. I don’t recall saying anything about government in agreeing with you on this point.

I’m sure we have other disagreements on the role of government, but not that selling at a daycare center would be a bad idea.

The question is – why isn’t it being sold at the day care center? My place of employment (not a daycare center!) is selling the flu vaccine. Not all places of employment are. Why not? Could it be that ability to pay isn’t well correlated with need?

But insofar as it is being sold at daycare centers, I strongly agree that that’s good. I’m not sure why you think I’m saying that involves government.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187663 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:59:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187663 Over a short enough period of time all supply is inelastic, but even with perfectly inelastic supply markets clear. That is, regardless of whether there is a market response over the relevant period of time, markets should be allowed to clear and vaccines should be allocated by that market according to the free decisions of sellers and purchasers. This notion that the government can somehow allocate vaccines more efficiently or more justly than the market is simply silly. If it could do that why stop at vaccines? Why not cars, corn and sofas? Over a short enough period of time all supply is inelastic, but even with perfectly inelastic supply markets clear. That is, regardless of whether there is a market response over the relevant period of time, markets should be allowed to clear and vaccines should be allocated by that market according to the free decisions of sellers and purchasers.

This notion that the government can somehow allocate vaccines more efficiently or more justly than the market is simply silly. If it could do that why stop at vaccines? Why not cars, corn and sofas?

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187662 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:59:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187662 Over a short enough period of time all supply is inelastic, but even with perfectly inelastic supply markets clear. That is, regardless of whether there is a market response over the relevant period of time, markets should be allowed to clear and vaccines should be allocated by that market according to the free decisions of sellers and purchasers. This notion that the government can somehow allocate vaccines more efficiently or more justly than the market is simply silly. If it could do that why stop at vaccines? Why not cars, corn and sofas? Over a short enough period of time all supply is inelastic, but even with perfectly inelastic supply markets clear. That is, regardless of whether there is a market response over the relevant period of time, markets should be allowed to clear and vaccines should be allocated by that market according to the free decisions of sellers and purchasers.

This notion that the government can somehow allocate vaccines more efficiently or more justly than the market is simply silly. If it could do that why stop at vaccines? Why not cars, corn and sofas?

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187659 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:52:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187659 My idea was to let the market decide who gets the vaccine rather than the government. That is, no targets. My idea was to let the market decide who gets the vaccine rather than the government. That is, no targets.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187658 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:52:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187658 My idea was to let the market decide who gets the vaccine rather than the government. That is, no targets. My idea was to let the market decide who gets the vaccine rather than the government. That is, no targets.

]]> By: Anonymous http://cafehayek.com/2009/10/vaccine-shortage.html/comment-page-1#comment-187627 Anonymous Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:41:00 +0000 http://cafehayek.com/?p=7011#comment-187627 When the government makes itself the near exclusive buyer and does not allow the price to float that looks like a price control to me. It certainly comes with all the attendant problems associated with price controls. But let's not get trapped by words; the long and short of the matter is this: the government has failed to adequately provide for vaccines by policies which have shrunk the number of vaccine manufacturers by roughly 90%. This is a classic example of a government failure. When the government makes itself the near exclusive buyer and does not allow the price to float that looks like a price control to me. It certainly comes with all the attendant problems associated with price controls.

But let’s not get trapped by words; the long and short of the matter is this: the government has failed to adequately provide for vaccines by policies which have shrunk the number of vaccine manufacturers by roughly 90%. This is a classic example of a government failure.

]]>