Thursday, April 08, 2004
It Just Don't Add Up
You're not going to like this.
Assuming you're a U.S. American, that is. Most of us probably assume that our health care system is the finest in the world. I did. After all, we're the richest nation in the world, we have all these great medical schools and, thanks to free market competition, we should have the best technology, the most choice, and the lowest prices, right?
Well, we do probably have the best technology—at least for those who can afford to pay. But, over 43 million of us can't afford to pay. And we pay more per capita for health care than any other nation on earth. Yes, I looked it up. No, I didn't believe it either, at first. Here, see for yourself: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/25/2465559.pdf
So we pay more, but we also get more, right? Actually, no. In Great Britain, where they pay about half of what we pay here, folks actually live a little longer than folks here (about 6 months longer, on average). In Canada, where they pay about 2/3 as much as we do, they live considerably longer (about 2 years on average). In fact, most citizens in pretty much all other "first world" countries outlive us. Out of 191 countries, the US health care system ranked 37th, the worst among industrialized Western nations. Check it out: http://www.geomedics.com/ebook/healthsystem/spending.htm
Dude, like, what's up with that?
It would take someone way smarter than me to answer that. But basically, public health care costs less—despite government inefficiency—because public health care doesn't need a lot of the stuff private health care needs, such as profit and marketing. Also, the administrative costs are a lot lower. Administrative costs devour 24% of US health care spending; Canada's single-payer system spends 11% on administration. Medicare, the big US health-care-for-the-elderly plan, spends a miserly 3%. [Source]
That's why it's cheaper, but why does public health care work better? Again, ask someone smarter than me. Better yet, read this: http://www.geomedics.com/ebook/healthsystem/index.htm
Public health may work better because of the little things: like, you get to see the same doctor every time, and the focus is on lifelong preventive care—because that's what's cheapest overall in the long run (better for the patient, too).
Maybe we should copy Canada's system? Actually, a lot of people in Canada are pretty unhappy with their system. And, in that survey where our system ranked 37th, theirs ranked 30th, only slightly better than ours. Still, the difference between what we spend and what Canada spends just on administrative costs would be enough to provide quality care to all 43+ million uninsured US Americans [source], so maybe we should take a few notes.
Maybe we should emulate the country with the best system? Gee, I wonder who has the best health care system in the world?
You're really not going to like this.
Posted by Me at 23:47 link
Wednesday, April 07, 2004
Kid Stuff
This one's especially for prospective parents. Here's some information from recent news that may help you raise healthier, happier kids.
Recent studies have shown:
- Chocolate is good
Women who eat chocolate while they are pregnant give birth to happier and more active babies. Chocolate also seems to benefit the babies of women who are stressed during pregnancy, making the infants less fearful, a study suggested yesterday.
[full story]
No wonder I turned out so good!
- Music is very good
We all know that music can soothe the savage toddler. But according to Don Campbell, internationally known educator and author of The Mozart Effect for Children, music also enhances intelligence, coordination, emotional expression, creativity, and socialization skills.
There's no guarantee your child will be composing symphonies by age 6. But Campbell does call music, particularly Mozart, "a power bar for the brain," not a frill but a developmental necessity in early childhood.
[full article]
- Television is very, very bad
Children under two should not be allowed to watch any TV, experts say.
Older children should watch no more than two hours a day, the researchers at the Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Centre in Seattle said.
Each hour in front of the TV increased a child's chances of attention deficit disorder by 10%, their research in the Pediatrics journal showed.
[full story]
And here's some good news for all us guys: turns out making babies (or even just "practicing") may be very good for you. I always suspected it.
Posted by Me at 23:07 link
Tuesday, April 06, 2004
The Price of Crying Wolfowitz
I opposed invading Iraq for a number of reasons: - Because Iraq posed no threat to us, the legality of invasion was shaky at best; therefore, the invasion would undermine the authority of International Law.
- War would kill a lot of innocent people.
- It would set the dangerous precedent of "pre-emptive self-defense" as justification for future wars.
- It would increase distrust and resentment of the United States throughout the world.
- It would increase the risk of anti-US terrorism.
These are just some of the reasons, and I believe in them as strongly as I did 18 months ago. Now they're no longer just reasons, but factual negative effects.
Because we invaded Iraq, we're also less likely to act when we need to act.
10 years ago tonight, Rwandans began butchering each other. The head of the small UN peacekeeping force there saw it coming, saw the rising flames of ethnic hatred kindled by extremists; he appealed for more troops, but because of the recent UN peacekeeping debacle in Somalia, the Security Council refused. On the night of April 6, 1994, after the Rwandan president's plane was shot down, Hutu extremists began systematically murdering Tutsis. The violence spread rapidly and became indiscriminate. With clubs and machetes, Rwanda's Hutus killed nearly a million Tutsis (and moderate Hutus) over the next 100 days.
The UN did nothing—except to pull out of Rwanda completely, after a rampaging mob killed ten Belgian soldiers. A concerted peacekeeping mission could have stopped the genocide, but we were squeamish, largely because of the deaths of 18 American soldiers in Mogadishu six months before.
Will we display the same squeamishness again, if we have the chance to prevent another Rwanda?
Did you know that a similarly awful situation may be brewing right now in Sudan? Arab militias may be carrying out ethnic cleansing. Hundreds of thousands of civilians have fled their homes in fear.
Because we invaded Iraq, most Americans aren't even aware of this situation. Because we invaded Iraq, most Americans would hesitate to commit American troops to yet another mission. Because we invaded Iraq, if we do choose to intervene, the world will distrust our motives.
How many more innocent people have to die because we invaded Iraq?
Posted by Me at 16:58 link
Monday, April 05, 2004
Around The World In Eighty Sixty Days
Kudos to "tycoon adventurer" Steve Fossett, for sailing around the world in under 59 days. He did it with a crew of 12 on his maxi-catamaran Cheyenne. Fossett lives an impressive life. If I had a few million dollars, I hope I'd live similarly.
Right now, I'm enjoying student life. In just a few weeks, I'll move into a new phase of life. Tomorrow, I'm going to start looking for a job. If you know anyone who needs a newly-minted computer programmer....
Posted by Me at 23:09 link
Sunday, April 04, 2004
Interesting Times
I can't get my head around everything that's going on right now. Thanks to extra snow days, and to Internet classes, I've had to work at least a few hours on schoolwork each of the last 14 days. I think even if I had all day to follow the news—and to try to make sense of it—I'd still feel overwhelmed.
I mean, I could spend several hours just considering Marlon Brando's 80th birthday, or the 10th anniversary of Kurt Cobain's death. A few years ago, items like these were headlines; today, they're footnotes. The horror, the horror.
Worst of all is Iraq, where daily killings are barely even newsworthy. Even the public mutilation of American civilians sparks only a short-lived outrage.
Some are probably thinking "The worse, the better," although I haven't heard anyone say it out loud yet. Surely every horror in Iraq, every dollar added to the deficit, every new name added to the unemployment roll—surely every bad thing that happens on Bush's watch makes it more likely that We The People will boot him out in November? First of all, maybe and maybe not. Fear makes a lot of people rally 'round their leaders, even around bad leaders. Anyway, even if it's true, the worse the mess becomes, the worse the mess we have to clean up. We need to work to improve things now. This is still our country, even if we don't like the guy running it.
By the way, someone asked me today if I was "a Bush-hater." No. I don't hate George W. Bush. He seems like a nice man. If I met him, I'd probably like him. As a person. He and I share an interest in fitness, and I'd be very surprised if he wasn't a big fan of Pink Panther movies. I don't care much for the policies of his administration, true. I do actually hate quite a few of those policies.
But never mind what we're against - what are we for?
Yah, I know. Politics today has as much to do with issues as fast-food advertising has to do with nutrition. But it's vital for those of us who pay attention to believe in and work for ideals.
I believe in human rights, in freedom; in Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. I believe in the global village, in solving problems by communicating with each other, in working together for common goals. I believe I am my brother's keeper. I believe if anyone lacks basic human needs—clean water, food, shelter, medical care, security—that all of us are poor as a result.
And I believe it's better to live interesting lives—in boring times.
Music In My Head
- The Supremes — "I Hear A Symphony"
- Cuco Valoy — "El Brujo"
- Joe Jackson — "Cancer"
- Nirvana — "Breed"
- Maroon 5 — "This Love"
To "the music machine": if we must have interesting times, could you possibly give us a little more interesting music? Now would be good.
Posted by Me at 22:37 link