This week I got some well-deserved pushback on a couple of posts. Peter Gallagher was not impressed with the story of robots and comparative advantage. (Update: Gallagher posted a new comment with a more favorable interpretation of the robot example.)

On the health care thread, where I borrowed Nordhaus’ question about improvements in health vs. improvements in other areas, Eric Krieg wrote,

Does 1948 health standards include the health costs due to the excessive smoking and drinking of that era?

…”Health” means so many things, and not all of it comes from a doctor. This engineer would say that very little of what constitutes “health” comes from a doctor.

Indeed. I think that economists have work to do to connect health care spending directly to health care outcomes.

To continue the discussion, return to the original thread.