Facebook founder and his wife have decided to give away 99% of their fortune. That is $ 45 billion.
Now, I know many will heap praise upon them for their generosity. Same deal when the Gates and Buffet did their give away announcement. But, I’m not so keen on this. I know, how heartless of me. How ungrateful.
Being grateful or not is my issue. Why, in an economy designed to make money from money, where labor has lost it’s power to assure proper distribution of the income earned from its productivity should I be heaping praise on those who are giving away massive amounts of money that was accumulated off the skewed economy put in place by those with the money to politically create this system?
Just how does them giving away money such that the masses have to in essence beg to get some of the benefit of such money provide equality in this economy?
If you do not know, Prof Reich’s film is currently up on youtube. I just watched it. For most readers it is nothing new. But for the masses this is a great film. Plus, I did not know that he literally went over on the same boat as Bill Clinton when they were going to their Rhodes Scholarship.
This morning on Washington Journal was a discussion with Marogt Sanger-Katz of the NYT Upshot blog. She wrote a post: No, Giving More People Health Insurance Doesn’t Save Money. It’s a controversial title for sure, but there is some interesting points that I know are often mentioned on a few email lists I’m on for my profession.
Let me just say I’m am a bit cautious of her writing after listening to her answer regarding why the nation did not get a single payer system in her interview this morning. She was correct there was not the political will, but she suggested that it was do to a lack of interest/drive on the part of the people. She states most of the people do not want single payer. My understanding is that is was more the politicians involved namely President Obama and the congressional dem leadership that flat shut down any talk of single payer and then the Medicare option. Ms. Sanger-Katz did not mention this at all. Here is the clip:
In her article however, she does mention the issue of “number to treat”. This is a big issue in health care and has been ignored generally. When the move was on to control costs, medicine began to promote prevention, only it was not prevention by means of better food, better life environment via a reduction in the risks of life (security of housing, income, aging). If you think about it, to promote better food requires going up against our industrialized food system. To promote a better life environment would mean going up against the entire economic model we have been deriving policy from that has lead to the life people are living today.
A year ago I noticed my property owners insurance has been rather high. I say property because some is home, some is business. So, being that have been using accounting software since 1991, I went back a few years to see how much. In 2003 the house was $454/year. This year it will be $1543. Better than tripled. Do you know why? Natural disasters. Google it.
The study—written by James Hansen, NASA’s former lead climate scientist, and 16 co-authors, many of whom are considered among the top in their fields—concludes that glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica will melt 10 times faster than previous consensus estimates, resulting in sea level rise of at least 10 feet in as little as 50 years.
The science of ice melt rates is advancing so fast, scientists have generally been reluctant to put a number to what is essentially an unpredictable, nonlinear response of ice sheets to a steadily warming ocean. With Hansen’s new study, that changes in a dramatic way. One of the study’s co-authors is Eric Rignot, whose own study last year found that glacial melt from West Antarctica now appears to be “unstoppable.” Chris Mooney, writing for Mother Jones, called that study a “holy shit” moment for the climate.
This is just so perfect. Yet again, our comedians have to do what journalist are supposed to do. And, he does it with facts! Considering here in RIland some rich dude (who just died) paid $20 million for the Pawtucket Red Sox (the Boston’s farm team) and has proposed moving it to Providence on the water front…for $120 million over 30 years in tax free land along with other stuff, Mr. Oliver could not have been more timely.
Unfortunately, the sense I’m getting is that the people are giving a rather large NO! But, of course our legislators are giving the “Let’s hear them out” line. One idiot, happens to be representing my home town actually used the phrase “loss leader” as the reason why we should spend the public money this way. Had the nerve to ask a person if they knew what it means? F’n idiot! Our senate leader: Afterward, in a one-on-one interview with NBC 10 News, Sen. M. Teresa Paiva Weed said hopes of keeping the team at McCoy Stadium may be a lost cause.
Watching John Oliver here, he could be talking about our Paw Sox situation. It is exactly what is being played on the people of RI. It’s a tried and true game plan used against the people.
Make sure you check out 3 points in the video. The first is 8:35 onward. It’s so funny. The next is 11:00 where he talks about the economic findings and one economist suggested better plan. The last is the end at 15:37 where he gives the inspirational halftime speech.
Just a little reminder for everyone. It’s not just his “giant sucking sound” comment. It’s the time frame he noted, and the advantages to a business going to a foreign nation. Well, tomorrow is the Fast Track vote and there are some dem’s who are not taking the threat of loosing their job seriously enough.
This is the latest presentation Nick Hanauer has made regarding the upside downness of our economy and the backward, selfish thinking that has gotten us here. In this one he is talking to his “plutocrat” friends:
We plutocrats need to see that the United States of America made us not the other way around. That a thriving middle class is the source of prosperity in capitalist economies, not a consequence of it. And we should never forget, that even the best of us, in worst of circumstances are barefoot by the side of a dirt road selling fruit.
He takes on economics and how it is used today by plutocrats to reinforce their positions:
…for thousands of years, these stories were called divine right. Today, we have trickle down economics. How obviously, transparently self-serving all of this is.
Then comes Joseph Stiglitz talking about the cause and fix for income inequality. This is based on his latest book. He lays the cause to the “supply side” economics and thus the results of politics and policy. It was a “disaster”.
The financial sector in recent years has been more active in taking money out of corporations than putting money into the corporations. The flow is going the other way.
It is nice to hear someone talking about the solution in a comprehensive way. A way that reflects understanding society and its economy in the same manor we have come to understand the environment.
Wouldn’t you just love to see them together on one of the Sunday morning shows around at table with say Senator Warren and Sanders and on the other side the Koch brothers and say Paul Ryan, McConnell and Boehner? Maybe a Chicago School boy or girl? Let’s throw in Jack Lew or who ever is the latest to hold that position. How about someone from labor and the US Chamber to balance it out? Better yet, how about simply a table of Nick, Joe, Warren, Sanders, Labor and Robert Reich maybe also Paul Krugman. Forget the fair and balance act.
By happenstance I heard today, Senator Warren’s interview on Here and Now.
I just wonder, was the answer to the question about running for the Democratic Senate top position adamant enough for those who keep pushing to have her run for a leadership position? How is it that some of the leadership in the progressing/liberal genre not get that she is already a leader? She’s leading already! Now, let’s get a few more please.
I’m not sure if there are studies looking at the long term effects of such advice on one’s health especially in this economy, but I can see where in the words of Arlo Guthrie, it could create a movement.
ROCHESTER, MN—In an effort to help working individuals improve their fitness and well-being, experts at the Mayo Clinic issued a new set of health guidelines Thursday recommending that Americans stand up at their desk, leave their office, and never return. “Many Americans spend a minimum of eight hours per day sitting in an office, but we observed significant physical and mental health benefits in subjects after just one instance of standing up, walking out the door, and never coming back to their place of work again,” said researcher Claudine Sparks, who explained that those who implemented the practice in their lives reported an improvement in mood and reduced stress that lasted for the remainder of the day, and which appeared to persist even into subsequent weeks. “We encourage Americans to experiment with stretching their legs by strolling across their office and leaving all their responsibilities behind forever just one time to see how much better they feel. People tend to become more productive, motivated, and happy almost immediately. We found that you can also really get the blood flowing by pairing this activity with hurling your staff ID across the parking lot.” Sparks added that Americans could maximize positive effects by using their lunch break to walk until nothing looks familiar anymore and your old life is a distant memory.
The Onion February 6, 2015
Maybe the labor unions could follow-up on this advice and determine what the long term benefits might be?
NORMAN, OK—Noting that similar outcomes were achieved under both approaches, a landmark decade-long study of mental health treatment options published Tuesday has found that talk therapy and antidepressant medications are equally effective at monetizing clinical depression. “Our data indicate that regular counseling sessions and prescription drugs have similarly high success rates in generating large sums of money from the clinically depressed,” said Katherine Hutton of the University of Oklahoma, the study’s lead author, noting that both methods demonstrated consistent positive earnings across chronic, episodic, and seasonal depression cases. “While some people make tremendous profits with drugs, others see substantial revenues from therapy. Together, these are two very powerful tools for improving the health care industry’s bottom line.” The study concluded that when both approaches are combined, financial results are likely to be reached far more quickly than with one method alone.
The Onion, February 17, 2015
I think this raises some ethical questions for the medical profession and possibly concerns for congress as to the incentives within the ACA.
Certainly, the expert advice combined with the study would create some discussion within congress regarding the policy related to just about anything…