[Americans] “felt ashamed that ‘their’ country's history was being stained by cruelties, lies, and betrayals. So they went to work in protest—not merely as advocates of universal human rights, but as Americans who loved the common American project…
Viewing entries in
Explorations Outside
Doing the math, that means 15% of the American electorate are liberal Democrats and 17% are conservative Republicans. Yet liberals and conservatives are increasingly dominating their respective parties, meaning a lot of the poor electorate is being left out of the political equation. These marginalized Americans may vote for whatever party is closest to their views, but that doesn’t mean they’re happy with it. And it certainly doesn’t mean that they are “really” Democrats or Republicans, as if those two labels represented a natural division of humanity. As if all political inclinations were points along a line stretching from left to right, liberal to conservative. As if “moderate” was simply a middle range on the line, a weaker version of the end points. As if moderates were liberals and conservatives who simply lacked the courage of their true convictions.
Let’s think beyond the line. Thinking within a box would be progress.
We've heard that power corrupts, which is another way of saying that having power makes it easier to lie, cheat, steal, inflict pain, or otherwise engage in bad behavior. This is partly because powerful people tend to be strongly goal-directed…
For instance, "cruel and unusual punishment" may be a legal concept but it is based on the moral principle of proportionality: that a punishment should fit the offense and not exceed what is needed to correct the behavior being punished.
The narrative of victimhood (Us) runs parallel to the narrative of strength (Them), which functions to control dissent within the victim group. Don't sympathize or associate with the enemy - they are powerful and will use you to justify their oppression. If given the chance, they will subvert our cause. If you soft-peddle the harm they have done us, you are a traitor.
Before you know what you’re doing, you don’t know what you’re doing. And other people see it. That’s why being a newbie on the job can be such an excruciating experience: if not in reality, at least in the imagination.
In most cases, lower inequality and higher GDP per capita were associated with higher levels of flourishing…. And then there's Slovakia and Slovenia: more equal, less affluent, and not yet flourishing. And then there's Russia…
When you're hot and sweaty and there's no relief, it's hard to have the energy or inclination to pursue challenging goals. Or just to get stuff done.
“…Happiness was linked to being a taker rather than a giver, whereas meaningfulness went with being a giver rather than a taker. Higher levels of worry, stress, and anxiety were linked to higher meaningfulness but lower happiness." Baumeister, Vohs, et al. (2013). "Some key differences between a happy life and a meaningful life."
In other words, rats make choices based on what they want and what they consider possible. They imagine the future, weigh the relative merit of different actions, seek additional information if needed, choose what to do, and then act. They are agents with desires and goals.
Most people accept that merit should be rewarded and bad behavior punished, but that doesn't tell us much. The difficult question is: how much? Part of the answer to that is: according to the rules of a legitimate system. And what makes a system legitimate?
…if we're around someone who's "higher" than us on a dimension that matters (e.g., wealth, looks, personality), the degree to which we feel good or bad about it depends (in whole or part!) on whether we feel we have what it takes to get where they are.
…what one considers fair or equitable is partly based on whether a person’s allotment is deserved - that is, earned by virtue of personal qualities or actions. Deservingness isn't just about what a person is or does, though. It's also about the broader social and economic context: the rules of the game that dictate which qualities or actions are rewarded.
I care about outcomes, not motivation. Greed is good as long as greed delivers.
But the California system uses a rigid, top-down approach that disincentivizes labor-saving innovations in nursing care. That's because California hospitals would still be stuck with the same minimum RN:patient ratios even if ways were found to reduce time spent on some nursing tasks (e.g., documentation).
It looks like job stress has gone up a bit over the years, while work hours and satisfaction with work load and level of RN staff levels haven't changed much since the implementation of AB 394. Kinda disappointing when you think of the added expense of all those extra RNs and RN hours. This is not at all to say that nurses haven't benefited from the implementation of strict staffing ratios. It just doesn't look like the benefit has been all that great. And then you've got to ask if it's worth it. Because there are costs to these extra costs.
“The basic takeaway from the analysis was that there is variation in quality from hospital to hospital, but that variation it is not correlated with for-profit status.” Maybe For-Profit Hospitals Aren't So Bad, Harvard.edu Blog
US healthcare spending is almost twice that of the other developed countries. Pharmaceuticals and medical goods (e.g., medical supplies and devices) are a relatively small part of that difference. If we knocked off, say, $200 a year in drugs and medical goods, we'd hardly make a dent in overall US healthcare spending – which is approaching a per capita average of $10,000 a year.
First we've got to get a handle on what the US actually spends on healthcare. According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (National Health Expenditures 2016 Highlights - CMS.gov), US healthcare spending reached $3.3 trillion in 2016, or $10,348 per person. That represents 17.9% of the gross domestic product (GDP). For comparison, the “Comparable Rich Country” average for healthcare spending was $5169 per person in 2016 (10-12% of GDP, depending on the specific country).
Problems are problems because they conflict with desired outcomes. Exploring a problem space may start with the desired outcome (universal but affordable health care!) or with a "problem-alert": the sense that something is wrong. Part of exploring a problem space is refining, clarifying, or figuring out what the desired outcome is. Part of that process is refining, clarifying, or figuring out what the actual problem is.