My contribution to today's WSJ:

Sen. Bernie Sanders ("Letters" Oct. 4) asserts that Mexico's "agricultural sector has been decimated by cheap exports from American agribusiness." To the contrary, Mexico's agricutural markets have been roiled by high corn prices caused by our subsidy-fueled demand for ethanol. Earlier this year, the Mexican government imposed price controls on tortillas because of sharp price increases caused by American corn demand.

To give the senator his due, he's correct that Carlos Slim's billions are obscene. However, since he's such a careful reader of Mary O'Grady's columns, he should know that Slim's wealth is not symptomatic of "the kind of economic development championed" by her. Indeed, in a January 25, 2005 column, O'Grady describes Slim as the beneficiary of "mind-boggling [telecomm monopoly] privileges."

Sen. Sanders's letter is here (sub req). About two weeks ago, I sent a letter that the WSJ did not run; it is below the fold.

Clark Havighurst and Barak Richman ("Who Pays for Health Insurance?", editorial page, Sept. 6) commendably call for "expos[ing] consumers to the true cost of health insurance" by passing a reform such as that proposed by President Bush. Oddly, however, they complain that "[a] significant fraction of the cost individuals incur for health coverage goes not to pay for care that they and their families receive, but to support ... medical education and research and the building of costly facilities." Just as part of the true cost of paying for, say, plumbing services involves covering the plumber's training and capital expenses, the true cost of medical services includes the cost of training medical personnel, researching new treatments, and building hospitals. Odder still, Mssrs. Havighurst and Richman argue that premium payers should pay for training and capital expenses "in proportion to their income or ability to pay" even though it is unlikely that the "true cost" of medical services is proportional to income.

The Havighurst and Richman op-ed is here.