Imagine if food were allocated and distributed by the government. Wouldn’t this prevent hunger and famines, which have certainly killed more people than epidemics in the history of mankind? Most students of economics should have a ready answer. The opposite approach—that government allocation is more efficient than the anarchy of the market—is illustrated by the story of the Russian official who, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, asked British economist Paul Seabright, “Who is in charge of the supply of bread to the population of London?” (recalled by Philip Coggan in his recent book More).
There is somebody in charge of the supply of Covid-19 vaccines in the United States, and that is precisely the problem. (That both the federal government and states government are involved is not the basic problem; on the contrary, decentralization prevents the centralization of error and improves the Soviet-inspired distribution system, if only by permitting experimentation.) A Wall Street Journal story sounded the alarm (again) on the dramatic inefficiency of the current distribution system (Elizabeth Findell, Jared S. Hopkins, and Dan Frosh, “Covid-19 Vaccines Are Getting Stuck at the Last Step,” January 17, 2021):
In South Texas, a man slept in his car for two nights straight so he wouldn’t lose his place in a line of hundreds of people at a mass-vaccination event. In Western Kentucky, residents registered for vaccination slots online, only to find when they arrived that their doses had been taken by walk-ins. In New Mexico, state officials scrambled to hire more people to staff a vaccination hotline after it was overwhelmed with callers. …
“It’s crazy that people have to call around to see what different providers have the vaccine, rather than having a central place,” [Texas state REp. Vikky Goodwin Goodwin] said. “People are thinking that we had months and months to prepare for this.”
Isn’t it tragic that such things happen and the same failed government interventions are proposed (like by Ms. Goodwin above) after nearly three centuries of modern economic analysis? When prices don’t clear the market, people wait in line and those at the end of the queue don’t even know if they will get anything when their turn comes. In this respect, the United States is not worse than other regulated countries but it is often not better either.
We should not exaggerate the Sovietization of the American economy. Looking at the throve entrepreneurship deployed by American private businesses during the pandemic suggests that the economy is more resilient than many would have thought. Yet, the trend of the past few decades is unmistakable. Sometimes, it even looks like military Sovietization, from the retired army officer running Operation Warp Speed to president Biden considering deploying the National Guard to set up Covid-19 vaccination clinics.
Even if government intervention is judged necessary in a pandemic, less Sovietized and more efficient ways would be more productive. The federal government could buy enough Covid-19 vaccines from the manufacturers by bidding up prices to obtain enough for the whole population—that is, by bidding high enough to divert enough economic resources to manufacturing and shipping these vaccines. It could then offer the vaccines for free to interested health providers and pay the shipping by Fedex and UPS. Even better, the government (at the federal or state levels) could offer vouchers to anybody who wants the vaccine and let Amazon (or any retailer) buy the vaccines and sell them in exchange for the vouchers or for ordinary cash from those who are willing to pay. With tens of thousands of intermediaries with incentives to deliver the vaccines because it pays to do so, the distribution would proceed like for food or computer equipment.
The trick is to allow the market to clear as fast as possible. Even the government’s preferred clientèles would be better served by a liberalization of entrepreneurship and a large measure of economic freedom.
It would go less smoothly in states, such as New York State, that have set up their own Soviet-style allocation of vaccines, but individuals could at least cross state lines to buy a vaccine if they want. And competition would, to a certain extent, push state governments not to hamper private distribution.
If ordinary economic markets are not allowed to clear, expect the political market to clear with the help of patronage, random access, and waste. We have seen much of that since the beginning of the pandemic. It would not be surprising if, as recently reported, a large number of vaccines are trashed because not enough government-prioritized recipients are available at any given time or place. (See also Scott Sumner, “Regulation and Vaccines: It’s Much Worse Than You Think,” Econlog, January 17, 2021, who correctly defends a free market in vaccines.)
READER COMMENTS
John Alcorn
Jan 19 2021 at 3:50pm
If people have strong concerns about fairness or vulnerability, and if they fear that markets would ‘favor the rich,’ then couldn’t government allow markets in vaccines, but also fund vaccine vouchers for the most vulnerable (or for any target group)? Vouchers that track or anticipate market prices would give the target group timely, effective purchasing power. Presumably, after Nobel Prizes in ‘mechanism design,’ economists can design an effective mechanism for setting the value of a vaccine voucher. Markets would work out supply chains. No?
‘Voucher’ might conjure disagreements about school vouchers. ‘Vaccine Stamps’ (as in ‘Food Stamps,’ a means-tested subsidy for purchase of food) doesn’t have the right ring either. ‘Vaccine Tickets’ — now that’s the ticket!
Pierre Lemieux
Jan 20 2021 at 11:45am
John: Indeed, I suppose that variable-market-price vouchers raise interesting questions in auction theory. In the case of covid vaccines, which are produced goods and where there already exists some competition, we have a good idea of what amount will incite manufacturers to produce more. And the government could always, within broad limits, give members of its preferred clientèles (cops, health personnel, the old, the poor, beloved minorities…) a second voucher or a third.
Craig
Jan 21 2021 at 11:29am
Today noted that the total number of COVID cases seem to be declining. I would assume that is due to the vaccines going out. While this article does disucss optimal/suboptimal distribution, I do think it bears pointing out that we are discussing DISTIRBUTION at this point. My point of course is that historically looking at responses to pandemics? Wow, mostly it was ‘hope you don’t die’ — even the 1918 flu, there were no flu shots.
Personally I think the current vaccines could have been distributed sooner. Still, it is Jan 21st, 2021 and there are two vaccines being distributed, another two potentially about to be approved and really from an historical point of view, that actually is pretty good.
It might be unpopular to express such an opinion given the amount of suffering people are still subject to. Trust me, I am not trying to minimize that, but in the grand scheme of things, the COVID vaccines are genuinely impressive.
I hope soon the government realizes is categorization is likely counterproductive and really this is about getting as many vaccinated as quickly as possible.
Pierre Lemieux
Jan 21 2021 at 12:26pm
Craig: Yes, in a mixed economy, the glass is half full and half empty.
Niko Davor
Jan 21 2021 at 11:37am
One big reason: Many political figures in authority are motivated to score points against their political rival rather than simply distribute the vaccine.
Andrew Cuomo said on a TV show that he was upset the vaccine would be ready before Biden’s inauguration. His first priority wasn’t distributing the vaccine and saving lives, it was preventing the Republican Party from claiming credit in public opinion.
Cuomo isn’t the only Democrat in a position of authority who felt that way. Now, that Biden is inaugurated, many Democrats will stop trying to thwart the vaccine, and things should go better.
Pierre Lemieux
Jan 21 2021 at 12:28pm
Niko: Politics is politics and you can’t have one without the other! Would you have a link to Cuomo’s interview? (I am sure that’s how he felt but would be interested to see if he really said it.)
Niko Davor
Jan 22 2021 at 2:14pm
This news article has the video interview with a full text transcript that is easier to quickly skim:
https://news.grabien.com/story-gov-cuomo-threatens-block-trump-admins-distribution-pfizers
Notice also, if it isn’t obvious, that Cuomo is accusing Trump of using the private sector to distribute the vaccine, which Cuomo objects to.
“they’re basically going to have the private providers do it. And that’s going to leave out all sorts of communities that were left out the first time when COVID ravaged them.”
“They’re going to take this vaccine and they’re going to go through the private mechanism. Through hospitals, through drug market chains, et cetera. That’s going to be slow and that’s going to bypass the communities that we call health care deserts. If you don’t have a rite aid or a CVS then you’re in trouble and that’s what happened the first time with Covid.”
“we can’t let this vaccination can’t forward the way the Trump Administration is designing it”
Jose Pablo
Jan 22 2021 at 7:47pm
“If you don’t have a rite aid or a CVS” … but you have a government built covid19 vaccine distribution center … which, obviously, are going to be built, mainly, in “health care deserts”, since it makes all the logistics and practical sense …
Comments are closed.