Why ‘Socialism’ Evokes No Fear

Once among the most frightening epithets in American political culture, “socialized medicine” seems to have lost its juju. Today that phrase sounds awfully dated, like a song on a gramophone or a mother-in-law joke or a John Birch Society rant against fluoridated water….

Mr. Canason indulges in some generic anti-Republican propaganda, but I believe his main thesis – that nationalized healthcare isn’t as frightening as it once was – is true.

I support nationalized healthcare for three reasons:

1. America spends more on healthcare, per capita, than any other industrialized nation with national healthcare. Furthermore, despite spending more, the quality of America’s healthcare is inferior. I don’t mind paying more for a better product, but I refuse to pay more for an inferior product just to satisfy absurd, unsubstantiated beliefs in the inherent moral greatness of the ‘free market.’
2. Health insurance is a zero-sum game. There’s a finite amount of ‘risk’ in the USA; insurance companies can only do better at the expense of other companies. They can, of course, try to reduce the amount of risk in their selection by promoting cheaper preventative techniques and healthy living. But this doesn’t actually solve anything – and the money health insurance companies spend trying to establish a low-risk, high-revenue portfolio is wasted. A (government) monopoly doesn’t have this problem: it inherits a well-balanced risk portfolio courtesy including everyone in the nation.
3. We have over 46 million Americans uninsured. The private system isn’t built to over health insurance to over 15% of the population?

Allow me to offer some expansion on precisely how much more we pay. I’ve graphed some statistical information pulled from the OECD and the US Census data.

US spending per capita, controlled for inflation, has increased from under $200 billion in the 1960s to over $1.5 trillion today.

Rising GDP doesn’t explain this, as healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP has increased from 5% to 15%. Americans are spending a greater portion of their income on healthcare. Are we getting better service? I’m not entire sure. Not to mention, we’re spending more as a percentage of GDP than England (and a number of other nations with ‘socialized healthcare’).

Not only do we spend more as a percentage of GDP – staggering when you consider that the USA has the largest GDP in the world – but we spend more in absolute terms as well, per capita:

The US Healthcare system is highly inefficient, and – in my opinion – should be nationalized. By all means, allow doctors and hospitals to operate privately. But the vast majority of healthcare – routine, common, preventative – should be handled by the government.

Blackwater is Soaked

Oct. 15, 2007 issue – The colonel was furious. “Can you believe it? They actually drew their weapons on U.S. soldiers.” He was describing a 2006 car accident, in which an SUV full of Blackwater operatives had crashed into a U.S. Army Humvee on a street in Baghdad’s Green Zone….

I find the fact that the US government is using private companies to wage war – mercenary armies validated by US law – terrifying. The Pentagon outsources roughly half its budget, and it’s still trending upwards.

It seems like little more than a flimsy excuse to sidestep judicial oversight and public accountability. The government has certain duties to the people, and other nations; private companies do not. I suppose it’s simply an advance on the concept of “plausible deniability.” Perhaps more concerning – it’s the “military-industrial complex” brought to life. When you spend a few hundred billion a year, companies spring up to happily take some of it. They then have money to finance a lobbying organization to expand or maintain the amount spent on their industry.

Given some of the accusations leveled at Blackwater – a for-profit organization that seems to ignore both the spirit and the letter of the law when they think they can get away with it, not to mention general incompetence – I’m not comfortable letting Blackwater and similar organizations run amock.

I would prefer to live in a country where I can trust the government. Or, at the very least, where the government is intrinsically harmless.

Right now, neo-conservatives seem to be obsessed with making a minority of hangers-on and yes-men rich, at the expense of America. We are establishing organizations with a direct incentive to reduce American liberties, commit moral atrocities, lie, and steal from the public. As anyone whose taken Microeconomics – or psychology – knows, people respond to incentives.

That’s not pleasant to consider.

fame, narcissism, and MySpace

I discovered an excellent post called fame, narcissism, and MySpace by danah boyd, a PhD student at Berkeley and a fellow at USC.

Some excerpts:

Since the late 80s, the lottery system has become more magnificent and corporatized. While there’s nothing meritocratic about reality TV or the Spice Girls, the myth of meritocracy remains. Over and over, working class kids tell me that they’re a better singer than anyone on American Idol and that this is why they’re going to get to be on the show. This makes me sigh. Do i burst their bubble by explaining that American Idol is another version of Jerry Springer where hegemonic society can mock wannabes? Or does their dream have value?

And, even better:

Today, the Christian Industrial Complex has risen into power in both politics and corporate life, but their underlying mission is the same: justify poor people’s industrial slavery so that the rich and powerful can become more rich and powerful. Ah, the modernization of the Protestant Ethic.

This is a fascinating observation, particularly given that income inequality continues to rise.

Has parental indulgence spawned a culture that justifies and embraces extreme income inequality? Does the dream of being a sports star, raking in tens of millions of dollars a year, justify and require sports stars to make that much money? Are people encouraging wildly out-of-sync salaries to fuel their own dreams?

It immediately brought to mind a quote from The Incredibles:

I’m in my second semester of college, and I’ve noticed some things while here. So allow me to generalize to a truly outrageous degree in my speculation…

College is a place simultaneously of burgeoning, impossible dreams and an incredible sense of entitlement. It’s like people are on a track to success (which, admittedly, is largely true; with slight variations depending how you define success).

Of course, college students might be ignorant, naïve, protected, and abstracted away from every care in the world – but they’re not stupid. Most realize the situation they’re in. That doesn’t make it any easier to accept, or understand the implications.

However, I haven’t noticed an outrageous amount of “narcissism.” Fellow students seem well aware of their limitations; they struggle in classes, feel overwhelmed with the amount they’re required to read, enjoy social situations but often feel forced into them by classes and sleeping arrangements. In short, it’s not much different from “real life” (excepting things like bills and real consequences for failure…).

I do agree with the study in that people don’t feel obliged to limit their dreams to what ‘could be possible.’ Why aim to work as just another faceless middle manager in a large corporation when you can aim at the top? It’s simply logical – just much harder.

I prefer to be around people who believe that they are capable of great things.