The beauty of competition

In the late 1500's, the lives of three great artists converged in a single place: Venice. And, the competition sparked by these intersecting talents produced a flurry of masterpieces we socks still appreciate today.

The artists in question were Tiziano Vecelli, Jacopo Comin, and Paolo Cagliari--though, ye may know them better by their nicknames: Titian, Tintoretto, and Veronese.

The Museum of Fine Arts up in Boston is hosting an exhibit dedicated to this rivalry thru the 16th of this month. (http://www.mfa.org)

One wonders if, individually, these three great masters would have achieved the heights of their greatness without the competition.

I doubt it.

And, that lesson resonates today--and in more than just the arena of fine art.

For example, as The ObamaNation has recently turned our collective consciousness to it's latest pinata of healthcare reform, those of us who appreciate the beauty of competition should make our voices heard.

The greatest opportunities for real reform lay not in the creation of some behemoth new federal entitlement program or bureaucracy. Rather, they may be found in the removal of existing barriers to competition.

Were ye socks aware that current regulations allow . . . nay, encourage . . . insurance companies to charge nearly twice as much for policies written in New York than they do for policies written in Pennsylvania?

We do not need to create either a single-payer system or a glideway to it as folks like Barney Frank suggest. Either of those "solutions" would effectively kill competition.

Instead, our elected representatives would do well to foster an environment that encourages competition among the various insurance companies that already exist.

Let those underwriters in Pennsylvania compete in New York and elsewhere, and ye will see premiums plummet.

And, the beauty of THAT sort of competition will resound for generations, too; because, unlike the alternatives proposed by the administration and its minions in Congress, it will not bury posterity under a mountain of debt.

Committees can be productive

As evidence, I submit to ye socks the result of a committee created by the Continental Congress.

On this date back in 1776, they returned a draft of the Declaration of Independence that won congressional approval.

Nowadays, it seems an all-too-often result of committee work is stonewalling, foot-dragging, and indecision. Or, worse, if ye examine the shenanigans of committee chairmen like Barney Frank.

Fortunately, our forefathers had the wisdom to appoint some pretty stellar committee members to handle the task of drafting the famous declaration:

* Thomas Jefferson, who did almost all of the actual writing and generally gets most of the credit (deservedly, so).

* John Adams, who made the first round of revisions.

* Benjamin Franklin, who made the second round of revisions.

* Robert R. Livingston, of whom I must confess that I know almost nothing about.

and, finally

* Roger Sherman (1721-1793) the dandy fellow from Connecticut, pictured here in the dryer today. Jefferson once said of his fellow committee member that he "never said a foolish thing in his life." Oh, how times have changed . . .

Did he just say "collateral benefits"?!?!

I refuse to allow the ongoing freakshow that is Barney Frank ruin what otherwise promises to be an awesome day in this little corner of heaven.

But, I had to do a double-take while watching my usual round of Sunday morning news shows, because this buffoon actually got up there on broadcast television to defend wasteful government spending.

This is how bold the hope and change crowd have gotten.

One of the topics o' conversation was the ginormous boondoggle of a "stimulus package" working its way thru Congress and how it's on its way to becoming as big a disaster as the Wall Street bailout package. He pointed out that recipients of that bailout turned around and handed out $18,000,000,000 in bonuses.

Well, Bozo Barney actually had the #*)&*)&## nerve to compare all those dollars ending up in the wrong hands to the "collateral damage" that occurs in warfare. You know, friendly-fire incidents, or cases when innocent bystanders get hurt or killed. Great analogy, huh?

In his world, dollars ending up in the wrong hands are called "collateral benefits." And, they're acceptable, sort of a necessary evil, a by-product of delivering "most" of the money to where it was intended to go.

What kind of philosophy is that?!?!

This is the sort of fiscal responsibility that's trying to re-direct our economy, ye socks.

Stop the madness!

And, bring on the football! We need some distraction . . .