If anyone says, “You Think Too Much”. . .

Just reply back: “Maybe you’re not thinking hard enough!”

Zakaria on America’s Problem + 25 Things You Should Know

In this weeks Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria makes a great argument that America’s biggest flaw is that we can’t fix something, unless it’s a crisis. For example, when the economy started to burst, we immediately sprang into action and tried to fix it.  Other events such as 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, we went out with alacrity.  But when it comes to crises at a slow pace, we have the attitude of “it’s not broken yet, so we’ll worry about it once it’s broken.”  This is a sad state of thinking.  From the article:

It is demonstrably clear that the U.S. health-care system is on an unsustainable path. If current trends continue—and there is no indication that they won’t—health care will consume 40 percent of the national economy by 2050. The problem is that this is a slow and steady decline, producing no crisis, no Pearl Harbor, no 9/11. As a result, we seem incapable of grappling with it seriously.

Let us come together, Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Conservative and at least admit that the trend of health care is a problem.  If you don’t at least admit that, then you’re not facing reality.  From there, let’s see how we can fix the problem in a rational way.

In other news, Newsweek has also brought out the 25 Things You Should Know.  Unfortunately, their website doesn’t do it collectively, so I’ll just mention some of my favorites below:

Aliens Exist
We are All Hindus Now
Books Aren’t Dead
Elections Aren’t the Answer
Bipartisanship is Bad
Americans Marry Too Much
You Will be a Parent to Your Parents
It’s Too Late to Stop Global Warming
Wiping is Washed Up

Leveling Out the Equality Field: An Experiment in Human Nature

There are many theories about what is human nature.  Are we naturally selfish?  Altruistic?  Rational? Or just plain dumb?  Let’s see this from an economic standpoint.  There are some people that are poor.  On one side of the argument, they choose to be poor (probably because of bad decisions).  On the other side, it was just bad luck that they happened to be born in a bad time in a bad place, that it makes it impossible to get out of that situation (being born in a ghetto, for example).

So here’s a thought experiment: Suppose we made it so that everyone was purely equal, not just in terms of economics, but also in intelligence, possessions, and status.  Everyone is equal, period.  Now this equality will have to be forced.  We’ll make sure that no one has more or less than anyone.

Let’s say we do this until everyone’s equal (this might last a few generations).  Within this time, everyone’s leveled off and everyone’s equal.

Now, suppose that after this experiment is done, we release the restrictions.  What would happen?  Would we see it revert back to how it is now?  Would we see society becoming more perfected?  Or would society become something worse than it is?

The World’s Worst Health Care Reforms

are apparently Russia, Turkmenistan, China, and the USA. You can read all about it here.  As the site says:

The United States has the rare distinction of being both one of the world’s richest countries and having one of its least-functional health care systems.Americans spend around one in every six dollars on healthcare. But, in aggregate, they’re not getting much bang for their buck. People in the United States are as likely to die from diseases like lung cancer as citizens in all OECD countries – which, on average, spend less than half as much per capita.

Looks like reform is in order.

Original Sin as an Analogy to Moral Inheritance

In mainstream Christianity, there’s the concept of Original Sin.  Basically, Adam ate from the Tree of Knowledge and all of human kind inherited this sin.  So we are sinful because of what our ancestors did a long time ago.

Does this work for other situations?  Well, in terms of slavory, for example, some people claim that there should be some compensatory justice because of what the majority did to minority groups a long time ago.  There is a sense of moral inheritance.  The current majority inherits a moral taint from their ancestors.  Now, I’m not here to debate reparations or anything like that.  But it seems to suggest that if one believes in Original Sin, then to be consistent, doesn’t make sense to believe in compensatory justice?  If not, isn’t that being hypocritical?

How Different Groups Spend Their Day

A very cool site that’s very interactive showing through graphs and stats about how people have spent their time in 2008.  Check it here.

Peter Singer on Health Care

The ever controversial philosopher, Peter Singer has opined his view that we need to reform health care and fast.

You have advanced kidney cancer. It will kill you, probably in the next year or two. A drug called Sutent slows the spread of the cancer and may give you an extra six months, but at a cost of $54,000. Is a few more months worth that much?

If you can afford it, you probably would pay that much, or more, to live longer, even if your quality of life wasn’t going to be good. But suppose it’s not you with the cancer but a stranger covered by your health-insurance fund. If the insurer provides this man — and everyone else like him — with Sutent, your premiums will increase. Do you still think the drug is a good value? Suppose the treatment cost a million dollars. Would it be worth it then? Ten million? Is there any limit to how much you would want your insurer to pay for a drug that adds six months to someone’s life? If there is any point at which you say, “No, an extra six months isn’t worth that much,” then you think that health care should be rationed.

Interesting way of giving a utilitarian argument for reforming health care.

Answers to US Health Care

BBC has provided answers, in clear language, about our health care system and the proposals to fix it.

Sexist Jokes Provokes Tolerance of Violence Towards Women

In an interesting study, the results showed that telling sexist jokes creates an atmosphere where violence towards women is tolerable or perhaps acceptable.  In a way, it doesn’t surprise me.  I’ve talked about language and equality in a previous blog suggesting that language creates what world you’re living in.

However, I would like to see the results.  Anthropologically speaking, men ususally tell jokes, particularly sexual jokes, not because they are sexist, but because it’s a form of camaraderie.  So if the results could indeed show that the men were more likely to be sexist in their everyday lives, then the studies have got something.  However, it seems that the study has ignored that.

Hillary Clinton’s Statement on CNN’s GPS

This past Sunday on Fareed Zarkia’s GPS on CNN, Hillary Clinton said something that I found striking.  Indeed, it sounds similar to Rawls.  This is what she said roughly: There must be, what we would call a safety net, in society: things like health care and social security making the citizens secure so that they can spend.

Interesting.  The point of capitalism is to make sure that the people spend money.  If the citizens don’t spend money, the economy falters.  What’s interesting about Clinton’s argument is that she’s saying that the best way for people to spend is to make sure that the citizens are first and foremost, secure.  For her, this means some sort of safety net.  So if people aren’t healthy or do not have some sort of social security, they’re not going to spend.  Rather, it seems implicit that without some health care or social security, people will save the majority of their income, thus it won’t get circulated in the economy.  I wanted to see what everyone thought of this argument.  Like I said before, it sounds Rawlsian.  Note again about my comment policy.