The lobster dilemma
Posted by Christie Malry on September 27, 2010 at 9:40 am
Why sharing costs across the whole community means we all end up eating lobster, even if we don't like it.
We've all been there before. You've gone out for a meal with a group of friends and you agree upfront that, in the interests of simplicity, you'll split the bill equally. The waitress arrives, ready to take your orders. The first person goes for the lamb. You'll have lasagne. Then the third person orders the lobster. Woah! Hold on a second! It's the most expensive item on the menu, costing half as much again as the second most expensive dish, and more than double the cost of yours. The next person, not wanting to be left behind, also goes for the lobster. And the next. By now the precedent is set, and everyone else orders lobster, just to make sure they get a fair deal. To further rub salt into your wounds, the first friend decides that they would prefer lobster to lamb. You're the only person who isn't having lobster. And because you're splitting the bill, you're going to end up paying for it as if you had.
The state is full of lobster dilemmas. If we were doing it ourselves, we'd happily settle for something less, but because we're sharing our services with other people, we want to make sure that we're going to get at least as good as they get. And they, in turn, want to make sure that they get at least as good as we get. The ratchet effect is continuous.
So we get daft pronouncements such as Gordon Brown's batty promise to raise expenditure on state schools to the level spent on private education (thankfully never enacted, even if it was a barefaced lie). Or an NHS that has, over the years, added all sorts of new, unnecessary treatments that were surely never in the minds of the founding fathers. But, because someone considers it terribly terribly important, it's made available to all. Bugger the cost. We'll all have lobster!
To be fair, the analogy doesn't work entirely. In the real world, there are whole restaurants where ordinary taxpayers aren't allowed to eat but they get the bill anyway. Or perhaps you decide you don't want to eat at the education restaurant. Do you get a refund to spend at the private school restaurant? Fat chance. Maybe there's a dish you really want that the NHS restaurant doesn't serve. If you order at the private hospital restaurant, you might find yourself locked out of the NHS restaurant.
Worst of all, in the real world, the cost isn't spread equally. The cost of our restaurants falls disproporationately on the rich. Fair enough, you might say, but that doesn't stop left-wing politicians and their groupies calling for more.
It's important, in these austere times, that we put a stop to the lobster dilemma. It means smaller, simpler menus. And it means expecting those who want all sorts of fancy dishes being expected to pay for them themselves. We never should have offered lobster, but we really can't afford to do it now.
Leave a Reply