Who should receive a Covid-19 vaccine first? Let capitalism decide – in the long run
- While the US health authority’s plans to prioritise those on the pandemic front lines and the elderly make sense in the short term, the free market must have its say in the longer term
And after those people? The thinking seems to be to protect the most susceptible demographics. For example, the elderly, not children, even though, ordinarily, in other contexts, the reverse would be the case.
These are the preliminary findings of US federal health “experts” at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.
This is fraught with all sorts of difficulties, according to Claire Hannan, executive director of the Association of Immunisation Managers, who said, “Giving it to one race initially and not another race, I’m not sure how that would be perceived by the public, how that would affect how vaccines are viewed as a trusted public health measure.”
Let’s look at this matter from a historical perspective. Who benefited first under a regime of relative economic freedom? Who drove cars first? Early horseless carriages were produced by Karl Benz in 1888 in Germany, Panhard et Levassor in France in 1889 and Peugeot in 1891 and the Duryea Motor Wagon Company in the United States in 1893. Other early automobile manufacturers included Oldsmobile, Rambler, Cadillac, Studebaker, Renault, Rolls-Royce, BMW, Nissan and Alpha Romeo.
Nowadays, the poor, at least in capitalist countries, drive cars. But they were last in line. It was the same with air conditioning, computers, movies, typewriters, cameras, fans, radios, televisions, indeed, with just about every new innovation.
So, it would appear that, on the one hand, we have greed and selfishness if we allow the dollar vote, and on the other hand, decency, humanity and the preservation of more lives, if we suppress it. Not so fast.
The free market system also saves valuable human lives. Rather, the dispute is between the short term and the long term. I will concede that the plans now being talked about by officials in Washington will immediately save more lives than if the wealthy are allowed to buy their way into the first inoculations. However, matters reverse in the long term.
What China’s decision to join the WHO’s vaccine scheme means
How can one become wealthy under laissez-faire capitalism (not the crony variety)? Simple: by producing goods and services most wanted by the public at the lowest costs. Riches are the reward. If we short-circuit this system by not allowing the wealthy first access to all benefits, including this one, we vitiate these incentives.
That means fewer people will want to become wealthy by becoming doctors; fewer will work 80-hour weeks to come up with the next space rocket, or pharmaceutical that will save lives in future. Life expectancy, other things equal, is positively correlated with economic freedom. Capitalism saves lives.
04:42
Trump returns to the White House after only three days in hospital for Covid-19 treatment
And not only in the long run. Why do you think the US is now on the verge of producing a vaccine? Socialism? You’ve got another thing coming. It is economic freedom in our past that is now coming to the rescue.
The Covid-19 drug will, at least at the outset, be in short supply. When an economist hears that, he immediately concludes that the price is too low, that demand is greater than supply, andthe cure for this resource misallocation is to allow prices to rise. Spurning this tendency of the marketplace will reduce supply and also cost lives.
Walter E. Block, PhD, is Harold E. Wirth Eminent Scholar Endowed Chair and professor of economics at Loyola University New Orleans
