Monday, June 23, 2008
exponential is her name
*update* barbara ehrenreich, the author of nickel and dimed, has a new book out and was on wnyc today. listen to the show, and then join me as we finally get libby in on the debate...
i guess since all the cool kids are doing it, i too will give you a little something something about the latest book i read. back when i taught for america, i worked with this person named liz vandlick. i guess she won't care about me using her name, seeing as how she never reads web logs, and every time we talk, she makes fun of me for updating mine. whatever.
she suggested that i read this book called Nickel and Dimed. so, i did it. the author went under cover in florida, maine, and minnesota as a homemaker re-entering the workforce. her goal was to see if it is possible to live on wages from places like wal-mart, nursing homes, and restaurants while searching out a housing, etc.
i'd write more about it, but to tell you the truth, i don't really have much to say. the book was eye-opening, but her style of writing was annoying and she spent half the time telling how she had to find a way to flush the marijuana out of her system in order to pass the multiple drug tests that were requisite to get a low-wage job in minnesota.
the main thing i found interesting was the outdated method the government uses to define the poverty level. they haven't changed the system since 1955, and it's based on the price of food tripled (assuming, then, that 1/3 of all expenditures goes toward food). this isn't the case anymore, and really doesn't make any sense. there's a bunch of other stuff too, but why don't you just go read it? mostly i'm just putting up a web log post because uncle ron requested it via peter.
i guess, though, i do have one thing to say. paul called me last nite and asked me my thoughts about barack dropping public financing. i do have to say i'm disappointed. this does hurt barack's brand that he is different than your regular politician. i, of course, saw it coming and knew he would do it--he would be stupid not to with the amount of money he is raising from small donors. but still, in the back of my mind, i was holding out hope barack would come through.
this is not to say i am disillusioned about barack. he is still the best-qualified for the job, etc. he is still far better than john mccain in many (if not all) ways. and his fund-raising apparatus is impressive and (perhaps) represents a sort of public financing hitherto unattainable by conventional politicians. perhaps this is excuse enough for him to drop the public financing? i know peter would say it is.
so there you go, paul. now you know that while barack is still the one, i will not defend his every move regardless. now i turn the ball to you to list some of john mccain's many faults....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
he's old.
he had a stroke.
he hasn't picked mitt yet as his running mate...
i'll let you know if i can think of any more...
sounds like an interesting book. defining poverty in america is definitely a difficult thing.
i'm many that have lived abroad saw unspeakable poverty...it's a thorny question.
your book reminds me of the book 'black like me', where the guy in 1959 dye'd his skin black and moved to the south. it is fascinating and saddening to read the account of its effect on his psyche...
'i'm sure many'
stevie,
I read this book in college and found it quite interesting. It opened my eyes, but didn't necessarily change my opinions. The poverty cycle is a difficult one to escape, but I don't think it's impossible. Still, every time I see people cleaning other people's filth, I am reminded of the plight low-wage workers are in. No easy answer...
As for Obama, I just can't get over the universal healthcare issue. Taxes can be lowered if they need to be, but such a radical change can't be reversed.
By the way, I enjoyed the photography. All yours?
wait wait, libby, are you saying universal healthcare is 1) radical and 2) a bad idea? please tell us why this is. oh and the photography did indeed come from the holga jonny and mel got me for christmas...
thanks deltar. you are a good nephew. love uncle ron
yes, dear stevie, I am saying it is both radical and a bad idea. I hate to get myself into this, but I guess it's time I stand up for my opinions.
I am in no way saying our healthcare system is perfect. I think changes need to be made, and under the right plan, there can be major improvements. However, I don't think this system, which has been proven substandard in many places (i.e. Canada and Great Britain--which is now trying to move away from Universal Healthcare) will improve anything, unless you see 'improvement' as longer wait times, a lower standard of care, and lower compensation for doctors who put many years and hundreds of thousands of dollars into their training. You yourself believe that education is the key to wealth. Why would people put that much time and money into that education, if their is no return of investment for their hard work? That begins the cycle of a lower quality of healthcare, and the cycle is perpetuated by over-regulation of prices for procedures, high malpractice insurance, etc. Last week our director of sales in Canada came into the home office for a training. At lunch one day, an inquiring mind asked him about healthcare in Canada. He immediately referred to the week before when his grandmother fell and broke her hip. She was taken to the emergency room where she had to wait a day and a half before she was even seen. Why would we want that? The government running our healthcare system is not the answer.
Not to refer to things that are not to be, but I much prefer Mitt's plan. A couple examples:
1. Allowing people to purchase insurance across state lines (which increases competition between insurance companies, bringing the cost of health insurance down).
2. Providing government insurance for the most needy (thereby solving part of the problem of the many uninsured people in our country).
This is not a radical departure from the system we have now. It allows us to take advantages of the pros of our system, while correcting some of the cons.
Okay, that's it. Be kind.
libby.
I won't go into too much depth, but that would reveal my own shallowness.
but I would ask you to consider the difference between socialized medicine (UK/Canada) and universal health care.
I could be wrong, but I believe mitt's plan went one step further than obama's to the left in that it mandated health care like car insurance.
obama's plan is not to have the government take over and control healthcare, rather to regulate thru competition and allow greater access to care, with plans similiar to what elected officials are provided.
trust me, government run complete socialized medicine like the UK or Canada is the last thing this country needs. I've said it before as a healthcare professional, I refuse to become the US postal service with crappy conditions and crappier offices.
but in the most industrialized country in the world to have 1 in 7 without health insurance, I don't think a radical change is a bad thing.
libby: are you comparing mitt's plan as a governor or mitt's plan as a presidential (read pandering) candidate?
i think you are buying into a false dilemma when you argue that fair compensation to docs and universal healthcare can't co-exist. one thing is obvious now, however, is that our current system is broken. we are already subsidizing health care with our higher insurance rates, etc. we should figure out a way to get everyone covered, thereby lowering rates in general and also getting everyone covered.
based on your comments, i'm not sure you quite understands barack's approach to healthcare...
peter: it's hard for me to really take seriously any member of the healthcare profession when they talk about the 'evils' of socialized medicine, especially one who is taught in school how and whom to lobby. of course you don't want to lower any of your profit margins, even if that is at the cost of the poor and underprivileged...
"it's hard for me to really take seriously any member of the healthcare profession when they talk about the 'evils' of socialized medicine."
Really? Isn't that the same as saying, "It's hard for me to listen to teachers talking about the 'evils' of our current public education system?
jonny: your argument would make sense if teachers made the kind of money docs and dentists do.
jonny.
don't give stephen any mind. he was trying to gode me. (and indirectly the rest of you dr's.) but mainly he was just trying to pester me.
stevey.
your comment to me cannot be addressed because i am not fluent in your language of misinformation and false analogies...
peter: remember how you think you know you've won an argument when i do that voice and mimic you? well i know i've won the argument when you refuse to engage me based on some made-up reason that makes no sense at all.
LOL.
you win. b/c its your blog.
I fold.
nice not to be in the sites of the hipsters for once.
true, mitt required people to purchase insurance.
mitt pandered and obama does not---not
the big devil in the room with obama is the 'single payer plan'--read government trying to become the big insurance provider on the block when compensation then goes to crap and doctors stop taking call and work less hours...which might not be a bad idea, hmmm...
like with everything else (cell phones, cars, legal counsel, dental work etc. etc), you get what you pay for. you don't put anything in and your returns will diminish exponentially.
obama's plan may work out. the devil is in the details and most politicians are moving towards getting more or all people insured. but just as the big time failures in social security will teach us, the less washington politicians tamper with competition and the free-market (beyond regulating safety, anti-trust and law breakers/dishonesty) the better off most systems will be...
nice work jonny and libby. you managed to turn stevie and peter against each other. i'm sure now that i have entered the conversation they will re-hone their primary target...
paul: peter turned himself into the primary target. libby hasn't responded to anything we've said, and jonny was obviously pwned. i will address you later, although i tend to agree with most everything you've said. however, your belief in the free market as the key to everything is slightly frustrating. the problem with that thought is, how do we cover those who can't afford healthcare? true, perhaps they don't need cell phones, etc. but they do need physicals. their children do need quality healthcare. and the problem is that the free market simply will not do that, as you can see in the dental profession where 25% of the kids have 70-75% of the problems (stats provided to me by peter). those 75% surely are not those in the top tiers of the income brackets. so, paul, if we don't have a single-payer system, how then do we ensure everyone is insured? or do you, as libby does, believe that universal insurance is 1) radical and 2) a bad idea?
okay, i ended up just addressing you now.
i tend to agree with stephen, in that i made myself the primary target when i highjacked libby's comment and informed her that barack's position is not to instate socialized medicine.
i tend to agree with paul that the more the government frees things up, the better off the majority of people become.
i tend to agree with stephen that the free market is not the solution to all strata of society.
i disagree with paul that healthcare should be or is considered a regular commodity like cell phones, cars &c for two reasons:
a) over the last 20-30 years public opinion has generally shifted to considering healthcare as a right, not a privilege (like a car or a PSP or an iPod).
2) we don't have advertised and accessible prices for healthcare administration, b/c the care you receive fits with the "standard of care," but is not necessarily one problem gets one solution/medication/treatment which makes market forces come up short when "shopping" for healthcare.
i tend to agree with paul the social security needs a fix and hereby predict that social security reform/re-drafting will be a major issue in either 2012 or 2016, but for sure within the next two presidential campaigns. and then i will make a post as arrogant and ridiculous, entitled: "I previsioned it"
i tend to agree with stephen's quote of my stat. in this case, education can become the serious problem. take our old neighborhood for example. like when a kid (who's single mother qualifies for medicaid) shows up at stevey's school with a soda, a bag of chips, and PSP/Nintendo DS and a mouth full of rotten teeth. this kid *could* be treated by me at columbia with a $3 medicaid co-pay. access is not the issue. education is. just another confounding factor in trying to reform the current healthcare system. where some poorer children are ignorant about oral health, many other citizens are equally ignorant about the healthcare that is available (nicotine-vaccines and other new-age stuff)
i don't think free-market is the end-all. i had another paragraph about the importance of medi-cal to a degree, but with a slightly crass example similar to peter's but in more detail of someone gaming the system.
no, i think the county system with medicaid and its services is invaluable. i think that the rolls of the county health systems should be expanded and the care happens here. there are often lines, but it is accessible to the poor.
true, peter. for free-market forces to be stronger in the health-care market there needs to be much more transparency in the pricing of it all. i've gone on record as being in favor or mitt's plan. i think that most responsible citizens buy insurance because they know that in distasters or acute bouts of serious illness that you cannot go without it. requiring those that aren't responsible in this way to purchase the coverage is important.
the devil is in the details but dosen't require a single payor as stevie insinuates. subsidies can be given for people to choose their own transparent insurance. i just don't think allowing a single payor system to burgeon and dictate the reimbursement standard will lead to innovation, quality and timeliness.
sure, certain elements of health care are a right. but not all not all procedures can be hand-outs. i believe oregon has already worked out a tentative list of what will be considered a right and what will be required of people to make budget cuts, plan for and pay for.
i took my example out for probable inappropriateness...
wow...paul is editing himself on my weblog? amazing. paul and i probably agree to a large degree about healthcare; however, i think it is wrong to automatically discount a single payor (payer?) system. perhaps it's not the right thing, but certainly it isn't evil as libby insinuates. and it's most likely better than our current system where the insurance companies establish the prices they will or will not pay (but paul will probably argue that insurance companies are just in line with medicare/medicaid, which is probably true and will highlight my ignorance). either way, the current system is not working and needs something that provides healthcare to all.
oh, and peter, you make good points. i applaud the columbia dental clinic, and i think it is an invaluable service. however, is education the only problem? is your clinic really accessible to every single person that wants to be there? are the hours such that a mom working full time can find a chance to bring her children there? is the wait time prohibitive for a working parent to get their children care?
libby: you still sit out?
jonny: nothing more to add?
oh and peter, if you didn't catch the allusion to No Country for Old Men in my "Previsioned it" title, then I suggest you watch the movie again.
stephen:
a starting point: look up the meaning of usual and customary fees.
I've been away for a week so it is interesting to read everybodies takes on the health care issue. I agree that the system is broken as it is currently set up. I also don't think systems like Canada and the UK are the answer. If you would like I have a great story involving a friend of mine who was on a mission in Canada and his companion had his testicle bitten by a dog. I'll spare you the details but lets just say his treatment was less than adequate. From what I've read Obama's plan is NOT the same as Canada and the UK. I am not familiar with all the details though. I do know what I pay for insurance and it is alot. It has more than tripled in the last 4 yrs. If the costs could be brought down and the accessibility made more readily available WITHOUT compromising quaility I am willing to listen to any plan that proposes that. I agree with paul, the devil is in the details.
Darin
private insurance companies would love to drop to governments rates, but many physicians groups still have some say in what insurances they will take. many of them have dropped medicaid and medicare because they aren't able to cover costs, pay employees, and make a profit...it will be interesting to see how this scenario plays out in the coming years as the elderly get pissed because no docs are taking their insurance because washingtonian politicians aren't willing to pay market value...
more transparency would certainly help volumes to allow people to make choices according to the cost of different facilities, specialties and docs. this would allow for more market competition.
tort reform is a big deal breaker in the mix as well. costs will not come down just by instigating electronic records as hillary has insinuated in the past.
i didn't catch the allusion...i must have been asleep at that point.
i loved the movie, stevie. don't get me wrong. i hadn't had much sleep and overstepped my abilities on that fateful night.
the opening scene was intense but not shocking per se. i certainly went 'wow' and maybe even laughed (sort of an uncomfortable, release of tension laugh) at all the boot marks on the floor...but it was an iconic movie and a powerful one. i'm not sure what i took from it that has made me better, but unforgettable nonetheless...
darin: I think i speak for everyone when i say we want more details about that dog bite story...
You asked for it:
My friend served in Nova Scotia and spent one day a week doing service for some members on their farm. One day one of their farm dogs got a little aggressive and bit my friends companion in the crotch. He went inside and when he hadn't returned a couple of minutes later my friend went to find out what was up. As it turns out the dogs tooth ripped his scrotum open. The poor guy was in shock and embarrassed. They called the mission president who to make things worse wasn't in so they had to tell his wife. She said you need to go to the hospital. They rushed to the hospital and arrive in the ER. The nurse asks what is wrong so my friend tells her that his friend had been bitten in the scrotum and his testicle was hanging out. she hands them a stack of papers and said sit down and fill these out we will be with you in a minute. They rush through the papers and then expect to be helped.
After 45 minutes of waiting my friend gets up and asks the nurse how much longer. She told him to be patient. He replied in a loud voice. I'm sorry we will not be patient my friend here has a torn scrotum with his balls hanging out and he is still bleeding all over. After speaking with a little more force they were led back. To shorten the story up there were 4 doctors and several nurses who came to "examine" the patient. To my friends (and to a greater extent his companions) horror the doctors at the hospital said they had no idea what to do and they were going to have to drive 2 hours to another hospital to have him looked at. They drove to the hospital where nearly 8 hours after first going to the hospital my friends companion was stiched up.
Darin
darin: it's the best story the dominion has ever seen. thank you for it. for the sake of my posterity, i hope we never see socialized medicine in the us of a.
great story darin!
my trendy hipsters...
paul: using mccain's middle name is stupid and makes you look old and boring. we are all hussein. please change your name to what it should be.
no, since i am not shocked by your antics...it makes you look like lemmings who read the story in the ny times about how all the cool obama kids are doing it online...
changing their middle name to hussein that is.
I make no apologies.
darin. I agree with everything Stephen said about your story.
paul: there is nothing wrong with adopting a good idea, is there?
paul.
i did like your lemmings reference though.
The paraphernalia of a car boutique plainly depends upon the assay and diversification of bring in a living it has to do. There are extraordinary sizes of machines of the unchanged congenial an eye to the aid of machining assorted sizes of castings and forgings, also there are different kinds of machines in the information of doing the unvaried accommodating of work in diverse grades of refinement. An pecuniary look upon is to clothed as occasional machines as sober to do as discerning a spread of promise as imaginable, and this is best talented whilom choosing high-grade machines which are not exclusively adapted to earmark of calling,
http://katalog.linuxiarze.pl/?action=premium&id=81
http://ardessy.org.pl/zarzadzanie-biznesem/1751/
http://www.web-adresy.pl/miasta,i,panstwa/pruszkow,p,937/
http://katalog.linuxiarze.pl/tag,baza,firm/
http://katalog.linuxiarze.pl/tag,krakow,mieszkanie/
http://shiadny.edu.pl/biznes-i-finanse/5148/
http://ighttas.edu.pl/spolka/5058/
http://katalog.linuxiarze.pl/tag,grunty/
http://susom.edu.pl/biznes-w-duzych-firmach/4468/
http://www.2uh.pl/rozrywka/bilety-pd704/
Post a Comment