<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Information, DNA Testing and Economics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/information_dna_testing_and_economics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/information_dna_testing_and_economics/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 22:53:54 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/information_dna_testing_and_economics/comment-page-1/#comment-348864</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:10:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/04/information_dna_testing_and_economics/#comment-348864</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;This is a great of how information can prevent the market from arriving at the optimal solution. &lt;/blockquote&gt;I would once again point out that a free market arrives at the optimal solution &lt;b&gt;for the market&lt;/b&gt;, which is not always optimal for the people involved.  

Being able to discriminate based on DNA may be beneficial for employers, and certainly of insurers, but that will leave a lot of people without independent income or health care, so they either die or we tax payers cover them.  It&#039;s a win for the market, but a loss for all of us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>This is a great of how information can prevent the market from arriving at the optimal solution. </p></blockquote>
<p>I would once again point out that a free market arrives at the optimal solution <b>for the market</b>, which is not always optimal for the people involved.  </p>
<p>Being able to discriminate based on DNA may be beneficial for employers, and certainly of insurers, but that will leave a lot of people without independent income or health care, so they either die or we tax payers cover them.  It's a win for the market, but a loss for all of us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
