I came across this article that was concerning the new healthcare bill/debate. Warren Buffett said that "out of control health care costs are like a tapeworm limiting growth in an economy trying to recover from a financial crisis". Health care eats up 17% of the gross domestic product at a time when other countries are at nine or 10% gross domestic product and they have more nurses and doctors and hospitals per capita.
Buffett would rather have the Senate bill on health care than the current bill. He would also want to see a bill that would really attack the costs of health care. Rising costs are holding the economy back.
This article caught my attention because we mentioned health care in class. Friedman is all about having a free market economy. The government shouldn't have that big of a role in a lot of issues such as health care. For Friedman, health care should be privatized. The market/economy should be able to work itself out, and that goes for health care. Government should be an umpire and only enforce the rules. This would rule out coercion. If I read this right, Obama wanted a health care bill that would have a public option that would compete against private health insurance. Friedman would definitely be against this, I believe.
Buffett: Health care "tapeworm" drags on economy
Monday, March 1, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Marx in the News
I was looking through some articles on the internet and I can across this particular article: Use of temps may no longer signal permanent hiring. This article tells about the current state of temp services with companies during a recession. It used to be that when a company hires a temp worker, there is a possibility that after at least three months, that worker could be hired permanently at the company. Due to the state of the economy, a lot of companies that are hiring temp workers have been hesitant to hire them full-time and instead, only hire them for part-time work. Some say it's because employer have a lack of confidence that the economic rebound has staying power. They fear that their sales will remain weak or falter as consumers spend cautiously.
Companies don't want to have to hired permanent workers and then get rid of them in six months because of the unstable economy. They are not willing to risk the cost of it. They are unsure about the going demands for what they produce. But now employers are squeezing more work out of the permanent staff they have left. So in turn, people are doing the jobs of others and not rally getting paid for doing that job as well as their own.
I took this mean exactly what Marx says when he explains how skilled becomes unskilled and capitalist needs a mass of unemployed people to work. It is in the self-interest of the company heads and not that of the workers. This is where you get a lot of unemployed people competing for jobs that paid less than what they are used to getting in hopes of getting permanent positions.
Companies don't want to have to hired permanent workers and then get rid of them in six months because of the unstable economy. They are not willing to risk the cost of it. They are unsure about the going demands for what they produce. But now employers are squeezing more work out of the permanent staff they have left. So in turn, people are doing the jobs of others and not rally getting paid for doing that job as well as their own.
I took this mean exactly what Marx says when he explains how skilled becomes unskilled and capitalist needs a mass of unemployed people to work. It is in the self-interest of the company heads and not that of the workers. This is where you get a lot of unemployed people competing for jobs that paid less than what they are used to getting in hopes of getting permanent positions.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Locke in the News:Africa's Continental Divide: Land Disputes
I found this editorial that I thought went perfectly with what we have been discussing in class on John Locke. The article is called Africa's continental divide: land disputes from yahoo news on January 30th. What it's simply saying is that in Africa, there are new legislation that are trying to get passed that would allow women to own land or have the right to land. It also says that the land itself is one of the main reasons for civil unrest and wars that have broken out in many of these African countries. They say that fixing the land problem could lead to fixing various other problems that are afflicting these countries such as poverty, famine, and ethnic conflicts.
The disputes over land comes down to two things: traditional and modernization. Many people feel that they have the right to the lands where they live because it was passed down to them. It was in their families or their villages for centuries. It is their means for livelihood, power, status, and securty. According to Locke, this makes them entitled to it because they added value to it. The are actively using it in order to sustain life. The soil is their bank. The modernizational aspect of it is now people are obtaining titles to certain land and claiming lands of others in the process. In some areas, outsiders don't realize that people are living in certains areas of land because they are hidden from view and they think the land is unclaimed. But in all actuallity, people do live there and have been there for centuries. But you still have outsiders coming in and claiming these lands, displacing the people who live there. They are taking what's not theirs. They are stealing from the native people making public property, private. Title to the land trumps traditions now.
It says that in 2004, 2.5 million acres of land have been allocated by five African goverenments to food production for foreign countries, often without recognizing or fairly compensating farmers with traditional claims to the land. And to add in wars that have occured in many of these countries, you have people leaving their rightful property only to come back and see that someone else has illegally taken possession of it. And the sad thing is that the governments and courts are so corrupt that there is really nthing these people can do about it. With that, there are also land going to waste because of missing landholders.
All this fits in with Locke's veiw of property. If a person has put work into that land then it is his property. To come in and take claim to land that is stealing. To have land and not use it is stealing from others who can put use to it, who can add value to it. But for the corporations who take land, you can look at it as them stealing from the people because they are taking land that is not theirs or you can say that it's ok because they are making money and adding value to it. Who knows.
The disputes over land comes down to two things: traditional and modernization. Many people feel that they have the right to the lands where they live because it was passed down to them. It was in their families or their villages for centuries. It is their means for livelihood, power, status, and securty. According to Locke, this makes them entitled to it because they added value to it. The are actively using it in order to sustain life. The soil is their bank. The modernizational aspect of it is now people are obtaining titles to certain land and claiming lands of others in the process. In some areas, outsiders don't realize that people are living in certains areas of land because they are hidden from view and they think the land is unclaimed. But in all actuallity, people do live there and have been there for centuries. But you still have outsiders coming in and claiming these lands, displacing the people who live there. They are taking what's not theirs. They are stealing from the native people making public property, private. Title to the land trumps traditions now.
It says that in 2004, 2.5 million acres of land have been allocated by five African goverenments to food production for foreign countries, often without recognizing or fairly compensating farmers with traditional claims to the land. And to add in wars that have occured in many of these countries, you have people leaving their rightful property only to come back and see that someone else has illegally taken possession of it. And the sad thing is that the governments and courts are so corrupt that there is really nthing these people can do about it. With that, there are also land going to waste because of missing landholders.
All this fits in with Locke's veiw of property. If a person has put work into that land then it is his property. To come in and take claim to land that is stealing. To have land and not use it is stealing from others who can put use to it, who can add value to it. But for the corporations who take land, you can look at it as them stealing from the people because they are taking land that is not theirs or you can say that it's ok because they are making money and adding value to it. Who knows.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Aristotle in the News
In the news, what is still a big issue is the crisis over in Haiti. Last week Haiti was hit by a 7.0 magnitude earthquake with after shocks of 5.7-5.9 in magnitude. This was the biggest quake that the country has seen in 200 years. It has resulted in a massive deaths, people without food, water, shelter...the basic nessecities needed to live.
On yahoo news, there is an article: More Troops, aid go to Haiti, but Hunger Persists. The main points of this article are the fact that even though this quake happened last week, there are still people who can not even get a cup of water. There are many countries pledging to give millions of dollars to this devastated country, including the USA pledging $100 million. But with all the help that is coming in, there are fears that the aid will not get to everyone or that it simply wouldn't be enough. There are people who are taking shelter in collapsed buildings and others who are now out looting.
I think that giving what we've discussed about Aristotle, he would agree with people going out of their way to try and help others. You have people who don't have to help out these people but they are doing it. They are giving them what they need in order for the survivors can continue to live, so they can eventually live better. Money is being given to help buy food and fix shelters and rebuild the country. It not about that money being used for the purpose of making more money, but to get the basic necessities to sustain life right now in that country.
I also found it interestin that with all the charities being setup for Haiti, recording artist, Wyclef Jean's, Yele, charity foundation has come under fire saying that he is taking money from the foundation for his own use. In a sense that could be a form of usury because it was said that the money taken illegally from the foundation was used to pay him on top of what he already gets. Wyclef claims that it is not true, but you never know. In a time of tragedy, you will always have a group that wants to honestly do good to help and others who looks at as a monetary opportunity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
