RSS
![[Nameplate]](http://www.dickinsoncountynews.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
Fair and Breezy ~ High: 91°F ~ Low: 61°F Thursday, May 17, 2012 |
|
America is Slipping--the Human Development IndexPosted Monday, August 3, 2009, at 1:16 PM
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a United Nations measure of how a country is doing; it has received very little attention. Originally developed to measure the progress of underdeveloped countries, it has been expanded to include countries such as the United States. The index measures the lives of people. It quantifies health, education, purchasing power, security and general well being.
For a long time, the United States was number two in the world behind Switzerland or Canada who have shared the top spot. Unlike gross national product (GNP) where we do well, we do not hear much about the HDI. Our rating started to fall during the Reagan administration and continued under presidents George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. By 2006 the U.S. had fallen to number 15. We are still second in income per person but we have fallen year by year in terms of the overall lives of our people. Unless we make some basic changes, there is every reason to believe the downward slide will continue. To me, the problems should be obvious. Most developed nations have universal health care, whereas we have some 50 million without such health insurance. In measurements of our health, such as life expectancy, we rank poorly.
College completion rates have been flat since the 1970s. Wage rates for the bottom 50 percent of our population during the same period have also been flat. This is part of what in my opinion is the biggest problem--the inequality of income. Rich folks have done well but wealth and well-being have not trickled down. I served in the U.S. Congress for 12 years. I was a Democrat representing a Republican district where President Reagan was very popular. When I voted against his tax cut that went mostly to the wealthy, some of my constituents were ready to lynch me. I believe that vote was the best I ever made because I knew the bill would start the ball rolling that would concentrate more and more of the wealth of our nation in the hands of folks who already were rich. Under Republican President Eisenhower the top tax rate for the super wealthy was 91 percent. Today that rate is 35 percent. We have greater difference in wealth between the top 10 percent of our population and the general population than any other industrial country. Unfortunately we have a political system where members of Congress tend to vote for what their rich political contributors and the lobbyists want in order to continue to get those contributions for their next campaign. There is little likelihood of change until people demand it.
But unless change is demanded, insurance companies will continue to dictate health care policies; Medicare will continue to be prohibited from trying to negotiate lower prices on pharmaceutical drugs; tax laws will continue to encourage firms to move jobs overseas; and taxes for the rich will continue to decline. Many of our people will continue to fall behind and with them, our nation's HDI. This blog will continue to point out that mankind's problems are primarily global--over population, pollution; depletion of non-renewable resources; the possibility of a nuclear holocaust. But I believe we must conduct the affairs of our own nation in a manner that sets the standard for the rest of the nations on our planet. Once we were doing so. We need to take steps to again be atop the world's Human Development Index--Berkley Bedell. Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Berkley Bedell--Retirement from the U.S. Congress in 1987, neither dulled my interest in the well-being of the people of the United States nor my worries about our governance. I began work in 2006 on a book outlining the country's problems and offering solutions.
Jim Frost--I share Berkley's concerns and in 2007 began the job of researching, editing and assisting with writing his book.
By early 2009, after finally weathering George W. Bush and recognizing how much the past eight wasted years have set the world back, our focus changed. We had seen no meaningful progress in the efforts to stem the threat of nuclear weapons, reverse global warming, preserve natural resources, reduce military spending, fight disease and hunger, improve health care, deal with the increasing gulf between rich people and poor people, establish a workable economic system, or clean up the political process.
For us, these three things became self-evident:
First, the problems are global; the U.S. cannot by itself control or solve them.
Second, the perfect storm of worldwide catastrophe is already upon us; what must be said cannot wait.
Third, in seeking solutions, the problems must be put before as many people as possible as quickly as possible.
This blog is the result. There will be much more. We invite you to participate.
Hot topics Cronies All(1 ~ 6:51 PM, Aug 24)
Signing Off for Now
Perilous Times, Drastic Measures
Step Six: Homeland Security
Step Five: Intelligence Gathering
|
Email link
Read comments (2)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.dickinsoncountynews.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
Mr. Bedell,
If our healthcare system is so bad why do so many people from countries with socialized medicine (Canada, Great Britain etc) come to the United States for treatment? Our healthcare system, even with its faults, is the envy of the world.
This country is based on freedom to choose who we want to treat us and which policy we want to buy. It is not the government's job to determine what if any medical treatment we need and whether or not we are "worth the investment". All you need to do is look at the abject failure of the Medicare and Social Security systems to see just how successful the government can be running large programs.
I would also like to know if many of the holistic treatments you have promoted and used will be covered on a socialistic system of medicine? Also, would you be willing to join a government plan or continue to use the private system which has served you so well? What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
The "rich are bad" argument is getting extremely old and I would advise a new strategy for you. Working people like myself cannot afford to throw expensive fundraisers for Democratic candidates such as you do with each new election cycle.
realiowaboy
I fully agree with Mr. Berkley Bedell and would like to give my perspective.
I have yet to meet a foreigner who has traveled to the US for affordable medical treatment and if so I would love to meet them to ask: "How do you afford it?" But instead I know of US citizens going to Canada for prescription drugs and personally know a lady who married a man from New Zealand to move there only for her need to get affordable good healthcare. Our healthcare system, as it stands now, is run by big business mostly interested in making money and not providing the best healthcare. There are too many cases where ones health declines and their rates go up, or worse they get dropped and are left going bankrupt.
The trickle down affect only works when a large population (as in our healthcare) is left without the means to pay and that expense is then passed down to tax payers and the cost of the service or product. Take a moment to think about all who can't afford health insurance and have unexpected trips to the ER. Who pays for this? In many filtered ways we end up paying for it.
So what is worse? Not having insurance at all or having a government option of health insurance?
I understand that our US Doctors receive their income by how many appointments or treatments are made and which prescription drugs they prescribe. Unlike France, which is under government ran healthcare. French Doctors are rewarded for good health of their patients. When they report an incline of patient's health by weight loss, better diets, lesser prescriptions and fewer treatments the Doctors receive pay raises and bonuses. Results are a healthier society and less of a burden on the healthcare system. I see examples of the opposite when it comes to US healthcare practices and this could be the fact that bad health is big business for many and humans are the cash crop.