I was listening to NPR on the way in to work today, and a couple of reporters were bandying about the Gubernator’s plan to make health insurance mandatory in the state of California. Suddenly it hit me: We’re all talking bunt singles here when we should be swinging for the fences.
Utterly lost in the debate about universal health care is the critically more important food consumption issue. After all, the reasoning goes, government has decided that it has a compelling interest in providing education, mail delivery and a common defense. The dominant political narrative on health care is that it ought to be provided by the government as well. But why stop there?
Most people are healthy, most the time, and a large percentage of those currently uninsured are young, healthy people for whom the unlikely prospects of catastrophic illness takes a distant second place to what’s for supper. Americans spend an astonishing $600 billion a year on food – out of their own pockets! Without government provided health care people only have two choices: 1) Pay for private insurance on the off chance that they might get sick or 2) Land a job with medical benefits. I suppose the penny pinchers might add that they might make hard choices and forgo that cool, late-model, SUV they’ve had their eyes on but real Americans are too natively generous to deny those with moderate means their third car.
But here’s the thing: Without food they will almost certainly die. And there’s something in this plan for libertartians as well – rather than arresting people who defy the law and refuse to purchase health care, people are going to want to eat. Of their own free will. Otherwise they’ll get very, very hungry and soon won’t be able to think of anything else besides eating.
And think of the efficiencies: Once government has nationalized the food consumption industry it can use its position as a monopsony to set any price it wants for food. Farmers will have no choice but to provide at the rates carefully set by wise government bureaucrats – after all, unlike doctors, it isn’t like they can up sticks and take their farms elsewhere. If they protest, or if their children decide not to follow in their parent’s tractor path, we can remind them of the fate of those poor kulaks who sought to wreck the dreams of the proletariat people. In fact – and I may be getting ahead of myself here, but I’m getting all shivery with that old fashioned “do-gooder” frisson – once we’ve nationalized the consumption side of the food crisis, does it not make perfect sense to also nationalize the production side? This would represent a sort of “great leap forward,” if you follow me.
And this is a proposal with multiple “goods”: Soon the mushrooming health issue of American obesity would literally wither away, since those same sage bureaucrats who decided fair prices would also decide how much food of what kinds should be apportioned to each individual. We must be on guard against the deceptions of critics that will call such a scheme “rationed” food care. They are grubby, bourgeois splitters, comrades.
Soon, gentle readers, very soon we will all enjoy the same uniform, nutritious and tasty meals that are the hallmark of government provided food everywhere.
We will of course have to consider whether or not to permit a hybrid system which permits wealthier Americans to purchase their own food from private suppliers – the French model – although simple fairness dictates that such provisions, should they be permitted at all, ought to be subject to punitive taxation.
After all: Food is not a luxury, it’s a necessity.
Think of the children!
Free market Michelle? We are talking about a couple of guys in a room. Trying to keep the entire community from exploding and having the teachers go on strike and all the parents of all the children go crazy.
I, myself, would have welcomed a full fledged strike to clear the air and let the teachers know that no, we are not able anymore to pay for their health insurance with a clean bill. Zero cost of Rx, zero cost to go to a doctor. NO, we as a community have been paying into a very different standard for a lot of years now and you need to start picking up the burden as well.
I don’t think that is too much to ask… Every year the private sector is asked to pay more toward their health insurance. Why is it that the public sector is insulated from this cost? Are they “special people”???
LOL
I don’t know, Babs.
I mean aren’t you talking about Lex here too? And the rest of them?
NO, don’t put words in my mouth Michelle. I am not talking about Lex or anyone else that puts the United Staes Uniform on. That is an entirely different discussion.
What I am talking about here are civilian workers for the local gov’ts that think they should be held to a different standard than the citizens in the localities in which they live where private sector workers bring basic dollars into their economies.
Lex, and anyone else that puts on the uniform of the United States deserves our absolute best, no questions asked, and isn;t germaine to this discussion. Those that teach school or run a plow truck or mow grass in our local municipalities, never being asked to stand for us in the way of danger, need to adjust their benefits and compensation to the community norm.
That is what I am saying and please don’t try to confuse the two.
Hey, Michelle… “the rest of them”? What’s that comment all about? Is it another… joke?
I’m reading between the lines here, but perhaps what Babs is trying to say is that the money has to come from somewhere; from someone. I can appreciate that thought.
In our system, state governments operate our public schools, paying the bills with taxes paid by the local population. You know. Real people, working hard, paying their bills and paying taxes into the state government.
If teachers in a given school district are successful in negotiating a contract that includes a stipulation that says they are provided with free health care, the teachers don’t pay any money back to the state so the districts can buy their insurance.
Who pays? The local population; they pay the teachers premiums for the teachers’ insurance by when they pay their taxes. So, if my conjecture is correct, the only thing the teachers in that district paid toward their own health insurance was their own share of local and state taxes.
Of course, the insurance companies want their premiums. No payee, no tickee. That’s how it works, so… the district pays the health insurance premiums with taxpayer money.
Understand, I’m just trying to help. No joke.
Wow! I really appreciate Michelle’s insight on these issues. However given some others’ comments, and my having a wife as a long time underpaid and over-achieving dedicated teacher, and me at one time having negotiated the quid pro quo including healthcare of a major labor union contract in another industry, I’m naturally chomping at the bit to comment.
However, taking lex’s advice sage advice for now, I think this old and sometimes obnoxious and condescending curmudgeon should just take a deep breath, bite his tongue, take a blood pressure pill…and just leave it for now…
But I’ll likely be back, ya think?
Please note that we’re talking about health insurance, not health care. Nobody is turned away, at least for life-threatening illness.
We now return you to your regulary-scheduled insurance-premium debate.
– Max
Well Filterman –
I suggest you and your wife move to the Three Village School District in Setauket NY. Absolutely no one working in this district could possibly say that they are underpaid.
As Snake says.
Best
Babs
Michelle,
re- “…why the US always comes out so poorly on infant mortality figures.”
‘Wince’. That hurts. Really.
“Poorly” as defined by what? Measurement against small population, individual countries like Canada and northern Europe? (please don’t list any countries for me. ‘kay?)
My $0.02: While I truly ‘wish’ we could be at the top of those statistics, I hardly agree that the reason(s) are because we (the USA) aren’t “socialized” properly (pun intended).
A little insight as to why from my observation of one phenomena. Here in MD and the closely aligned District of Columbia, public policy (Law) requires childhood immunization documentation for school attendance just like Nova Scotia probably does. Yet, despite the ‘free’ shots abundantly offered, there is always that percentage who, no matter how easy they are to obtain at free clinics or at the schools themselves, year round, do not participate. And every year I see hard ball being threatened but never really followed through…
Why is this? I ain’t hardly a socioligist but I would offer that individual choice through ignorance probably or because they simply don’t care are the reasons..I know we (the USA) are constantly working on the ignorance part (we spend a lot to achieve that end), but the don’t care side is insidious in a free society….
Make the jump to prenatal care and think about that “ignorance and not caring”. Calculate in the abortion-on-demand variable and I am sure you will find an answer.
Therefore, IMO, ’socializing’ (providing free) is not the whole answer. Unless of course, government were to dragnet and incarcerate for “their own good” all those who are ignorant or simply don’t care (both personal choices I remind you)…and I don’t think you would advocate that, would you?
b2
I think Lex has the answer in comment #43 above:
…much of the infant mortality rate is given over to extraordinary efforts by US physicians in cases that many modern medical systems overseas would have given up for lost early, I understand.
The cute little post whose thread will not quite die continues: The comparatively elevated infant mortality rate in the US is a combination of three things, I understand:
1) There are significant demographic and lifestyle factors that B2 alludes to which negatively skew US performance against more homogeneous populations. US teen births are three times the Canadian rate and seven times the rate of Sweden or Japan.
2) US medicine is far more likely to use heroic methods to save the lives of “super preemies” that in other industrialized societies would be cast off as miscarriages and not counted as live births.
3) US medicine is rather more prone to using ‘advanced’ fertility treatments that result in ’super-twin’ (i.e., triplets or more) pregnancies, all of which inevitably result in premature birth of lower weight infants at higher risk.
If something sounds too good to be true – in this case the “good” being tied more to one’s political preferences than to any objective notion of good – it probably is.
What happened to the light-hearted jab at the Dem’s communist tendencies? Yikes!
B2, I wasn’t suggesting ’socialized medicine’ (some day, if I ever had the time, I could write my own post on that phrase) was the ‘cure’ to the infant mortality question. Like I said, I really don’t understand it. It makes no sense to me, given that the US would likely have the newest technology and such highly trained medical perosnel.
Not sure that you can extrapolate from the immunization issue to prenatal care, though. It would be interesting to know what percentage of parents who choose not to immunize actually choose not to immunize. Because of concern about the vaccines themselves. Rightly or wrongly. Because even if you think they are making a bad decision, there’s still a difference between weighing the risks and making a decision that you think is best and simply not caring.
And although I realize that a ‘not caring’ vector that would bring down those stats, wouldn’t every country have that sector of its population to contend with? On demand abortion … wouldn’t (shouldn’t) be included in infant mortality stats, I wouldn’t think… Is it?
Country size? Well that shouldn’t matter either, since the numbers would be a percentage of babies who survive beyond a certain age v. those who don’t, right?
Sorry, B2, you may not believe this but I’m honestly not trying to shoot down your thoughts one by one. I’m just thinking out loud in response to them. They’re all interesting ideas, but I’m just not sure how well they measure up. Although there may well be some relevant point I’m missing here so, if so, someone please tell me.
FbL, I responded to Lex’s comment in my #47, above. I might be missing there too but that one doesn’t make sense to me either.
Sorry, Lex, published the last one without seeing yours above. Well, #1 and #3 would make sense to me, still can’t get my head around your #2, as I said above.
Yep, you’re right. This thread just doesn’t want to die. But you, sir, please don’t play so innocent, I for one ain’t buying it. And Steve, you all were having way too much fun with that “light-hearted jab at the Dem’s communist tendencies” … cough, choke, sputter…
Somebody had to do something to put a stop to it!
But, I must admit, it was a great post, another one of Lex at his finest. Now if only he was on my side.
Sorry to do a triple-header but…
Read the link and still don’t get it. Super-preemies are still born alive, to take one breath, whatever country the mother is in, right? So whether he dies immediately or after ‘heroic measures’, shouldn’t the death still count the same way?
I’m not a neo-natal specialist (obviously) but the way I understand it is that super-preemies can’t take a breath on their own, their lungs are insufficiently developed – they must be mechanically ventilated. The mortality risk is nevertheless very high, but these are counted as live births.
In other places different standards of care apply and such unfortunates are considered not to have been “live births” and do not count as infant deaths.
D’uh.
Once you stated the obvious, it suddenly became a little bit clearer.
I might just have to concede that one to you. Certainly for some countries anyway.
Michelle,
I know you aren’t advocating socialized medicine per se (who would? though we can parse things all day), but the Canadian system you often advocate for it’s fairness is ’socialized medicine’ to many of us residing south of you. At least Mr. Moore seems to think so.
You may see your wish for us realized though. Certainly we seem destined to go down that path if a Hilbil, Obama or Edwards is elected…unfortunetly.
Could you agree that our higher infant mortality rate could be related to ignorance on the part of some pregnant women? The point I was making is if you don’t take the time to partake in all the free shot clinics for your own living children..can’t that same mindset be at work while they are pregnant and not following a healthy lifestyle and avoiding neo-natal care therfore leading to a higher mortality rate?
I used an observation on what I was familiar with to buttress a point is all.
Now, seeing how you’ve forced me (just kidding) to reread last May’s announcement via google I see that Canada is #9 and the US is 10 with Sweden/Norway/Finland #1-3. The difference between Canada and the US-is statistically negligible (3 credits, Prob/Stats, UCONN 1972). I would state that 2.3 vs 5.5/1000 could easily be accounted for by what Lex says could be a factor.
DC? Over 12 in 1000. We can both agree that is unacceptable. Twice as high as the US & Canada overall and nearly 5 times higher than Finland.
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2006/mothers.moments/interactive/popup.mothers.charts/frameset.exclude.html
b2
While perusing a British blog I read occasionally, the following item was posted as an example of what ails their medical delivery system these days. Obviously, it’s just an example of yet a much larger problem present in Great Britain.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=494118&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770
On the super-preemie situation, over the past few months I’ve become fairly well versed in the subject. My own was born at 28 weeks gestation, and thanks to a steroid shot six weeks prior her lungs were developed enough she could breathe with a little assistance from a CPAP machine. A week earlier, she would have required a ventilator. Four weeks earlier and the chances she’d live would have been under 15%.
Even at 22 weeks they try to save them. Some live for hours, some minutes, some continue to fight and are transfused and fussed over. Remember, at 28 weeks their brains haven’t finished wiring yet. They don’t know to breathe, don’t know to keep their heart rates between 150 and 170, they often times forget and have to be stimulated. Mine stopped breathing or slowed her heart rate below 100 at least a dozen times a day, which was considered remarkably few. If not caught quickly, dead baby.
In the NICU, down from my child, is a little boy of 15 ounces. Born at 24 weeks gestation. Anywhere else they’d have counted him as a stillborn. Here he’s going to become a datum in that statistic.
So, in short, infant mortality stats are meaningless unless the raw data can be compared for similar gestational ages.
– Max
Peter, that is SO ridiculous.
But in the context of healthcare, I think the problem lies here:
The procedure is supposed to be funded by the state only if the patient claims she has been raped. But some doctors agree to carry it out for cultural or cosmetic reasons.
It shouldn’t be covered unless medically necessary. Not culturally necessary. IMHO.
B2, I don’t have any particular wish for your healthcare system. Really.
I just get ’started’, as my husband likes to say, when I hear the over-the-top hyperbole panic attacks that occur every time anything that would move you away from your current situation is suggested. I don’t really care what kind of healthcare system you have, its your business, not mine.
But I do care and very quickly get caught up in the nitty gritty when I perceive our system as being attacked. Because if it was as its often painted, then the Great White Up would be little more than a frozen wasteland (for at least half the year) devoid of all human life. Seeing as we would all be dead. From our health care system. That’s probably the biggest piece of it for me… you know how many respond when they perceive the US as being wrongfully criticized by another country … for anything. Well, now you know where I sit.
The other piece of it is for me… it just seems stupid. Some Americans appear to be happy with their system. More power to them. Some, obviously, are not. It would be interesting to know those numbers, just as a matter of curiousity. But for those Americans that aren’t happy, that say your system sucks, there is a subgroup who scream bloody murder at all suggestions for reform. Without, that I have seen anyway, coming forward with any of their own ideas since they obviously don’t like those being presented. Which, I suppose, leaves them stuck where they are. Which, again, is their own business. Except that it seems kind of silly to me when a lot of their inaction appears to be the product of misinformation and fearmongering. That’s all.
I don’t wish to pick on Fliterman, but he makes an interesting statement that deserves a little scrutiny. “However given some others’ comments, and my having a wife as a long time underpaid and over-achieving dedicated teacher,”.
Let’s look at that for a moment. First, there is the underpaid issue. Let’s say we’re teaching high school. The qualification for teaching high school is to be a high school graduate, is it not? That should have one familiar with the material and capable of teaching it to others. So while being a dedicated teacher might be a rare thing, being capable of teaching algebra isn’t quite so rare. Scarcity is a measure of value — if your abilities are scarce they demand a higher value on the market. Ditch diggers can be hired for a dime a dozen, heart surgeons take a bit more.
So the qualifications for being a teacher aren’t so great that they disqualify a large number from the job pool. Yet we entrust teachers with our kids for a quarter of each day, trust them to teach them right from wrong as well as reading and writing and algebra, is that not something that should cause us to pay a bit more for the motivated and successful teachers?
But take a look at college, where those with doctorates and research and published works command fairly good salaries and the students pay through the nose for access to them. The grad students, those working towards a higher degree but having successfully completed their undergrad work, are teaching the new undergrads. I detect a pattern.
Once you know the material it seems that one is qualified to teach it. K-12 teachers and grad students are underpaid, yet they are the largest pool of qualified labor. One would have to determine if the teacher was worth more based upon subjective assessments such as “dedication” or “popularity” or perhaps upon some score based upon testing of the pupils to determine overall ability to impart knowledge.
Now let’s take that to health care. Nurses are underpaid, supposedly, but there’s a lot of nurses and the market sort of decides what they’re worth. Heart and brain surgeons seem to command a higher price, but they’ve more specific knowledge that isn’t common in the market.
We’re discussing health insurance, how to pay for health care. Well, we can hire a nurse for that headache or we can hire a brain surgeon at a significant added cost. Everybody wants the brain surgeon, everybody wants to pay for the nurse. There is no program that will reconcile these differences.
– Max
No problem, Max… you aren’t picking on me. You actually give me some purpose.
1. My wife – as most all who teach our next generation and ensure our nation’s future – did so for the love of the occupation and especially for her students…. and hardly for her ever low salary. Although she taught elementary, she held postgraduate degrees and other credentials. Indeed, she has been recognized both locally and nationally for her work. Yet after 30+ years of teaching, and spending much of her own (and my) money for her classrooms and students’ supplies, she retired recently at a salary less than our daughter’s starting salary 30 years her junior in another notorious low-paying industry. Yet she has no regrets or complaints. She would have been happy to teach for free – and relatively, she nearly did. But as an economist and populist, I do have strong complaints, if not for her exploitation, certainly to the inequity of her remuneration given her extraordinary value.
(Babs earlier complained about teachers’ wages in her Three Village School District. My check reveals their average teacher salary there is $63,000 per annum. If I lived there, I would be very proud of that figure. It means those people have their priorities right and is money well spent. (New York is #3 in the nation for teachers’ salaries. But I wouldn’t be surprised if garbage collectors on Long Island made similar wages, if not more…. probably have greater paid medical benefits too, ya thinks?)
(At the peak of her profession, and with some former students of significant later accomplishments, unfortunately, my wife never was so financially recoganized.)
2. My brother-in-law who was an esteemed professor at a university for years had to work at a farm in the summers at little more than minimum wage just to make ends meet and raise a family. (Fortunately now in retirement, he has written a number of books and also now lectures worldwide… but he seriously struggled financially most of his earlier life as a well recognized engineering professor.)
[And today hedge fund managers who produce nothing and contribute to society nothing, individually make over a $ billion a year.]
3. I have had the occasion of being unemployed and uninsured, fearing illness and in fact becoming ill. I have also known many in the same circumstance. To say that “Everybody wants the brain surgeon, everybody wants to pay for the nurse,” is offensive to me. You should know the sick…. the dying just want to live, and don’t care who helps them.
When you are sick, you only care about seeing someone who might make you well. That is why many seriously ill seek (if they can pay for it) medical solutions in foreign countries. Beggars cannot be choosers, and they aren’t, even if their life is in the balance. Pardon me if I bristle at the insensitiveness and lack of empathy for those less fortunate or in medical peril.
Experience is always the best teacher. But I wish no one the experience of having a family and not having any heath insurance, whether employed or not.
Premiums are prohibitive for most. Even if they can afford it, 14% are denied outright for prior conditions. Routine and preventative medical check-ups are out of the question. The persistent fear of any real medical problem is palpable, even if none ever occurs. The occurrence of even a minor illness is traumatic, emotionally and financially. A serious medical family problem threatens everything. People in that situation hardly request a “brain surgeon” …and to imply they do exposes both a serious lack of experience and empathy.
Bottom line – if you get slightly to seriously sick in this great nation of ours without health insurance – like 47 million of us are – just see how the mantra, “no one is turned away at the ER” takes care of you. 2nd world countries do far better.
We have solutions. But too many are afraid of political, economic, and theoretical boogiemen, rather than our nation’s people’s wellbeing.
Michelle-
Gee. I thought we were discussing infant mortality rates…..???…Reckon not. I hate the health care discussion..for a lotta reasons- stupid o’me to let you drag me in!
Seems we’ve morphed back to US vs Canadian health care where y’all cherry-pick the best of the US, like our drug innovations and medical inventions- yet slam us for the freedom our citizens choose- to have health insurance or not…
Attention on deck! You happy. Me happy. Let’s leave it at that! No mas, pour favor.
re- “the frozen north and all”
Y’all are poised to be big winners if’n global warming goes down as algore and the UN say it will..LOL. Read it on da Drudge-must be true….O’course all that Canadian Balkanization lying latent will manifest itself quickly.
b2
re: fliterman #55 – bits are to be “champed”, not “chomped”.
..and as of yet, no one has yet proposed a valid solution to the lack of rainbows, lollipops and ponies.
MM – Thanks, but not to be too pedantic, while “champ” is the original and perhaps the more correct term within the idiom, “chomp” is now more common and is also generally accepted as correct usage. And “chomp” is what I prefer and use.
“Champ at the bit” was used before “chomp at the bit” and it has enjoyed a nice, long reign. However, popular usage has been swinging towards “chomp at the bit” since it first began being used in the phrase, sometime around the beginning of the 20th century. In fact, our evidence indicates that “chomping at the bit” is used in recent print sources more frequently than “champ at the bit,” so we can’t possibly ignore It. Word.com
But far more importantly, protecting and preserving one’s health by whatever means can hardly be equated to your flip “lollipops” etc.
…while the term “health insurance” is certainly in popular usage as a flip term for “government cheese ‘entitlements’”, rainbows and lollipops is the term that i prefer and use.
But I wouldn’t be surprised if garbage collectors on Long Island made similar wages, if not more…. probably have greater paid medical benefits too, ya thinks?)
Eh, actually I don’t think. Garbage collection is privately contracted so no direct taxpayer tit involved…
And, in addition, how could you have “greater paid medical benefits” than paying nothing for your medical care? You get to bring a friend along?
My thoughts on this extraordinary thread:
Just back from the weekend (this AM)and lo and behold… a tongue in cheek post from Lex that morphs into a seemingly millenial long thread ( a/k/a – a migrane inducing pissing contest) concerning the merits and/or demerits of various health care systems/insurance(s)…uggh!!!
the doctrine of unintended consequenses couples with that old saw ….no good deed goes unpunished …( I hope Lex puts this experience in his lessions learned file)
that said … and snark notwithstanding, I read every comment and managed to stay awake… no terminal ennui this time. Some very pointed comments and internet fisticuffs seemed likely…but the Rt. Hon. Rev. Lex, demonstrating his seldom called upon pastoral skills, stepped in ( see comment # 43 above) and partially defused the situation..that and the threat of an internet hug from FbL did it … cloyingly painfull Kumbuya moments followed …almost everybody kissed and made up… play dates and sleepovers were arranged and all eventually came to Jesus…
Seriously (really)…snarky grab-ass aside it was a truly amazing and revealing thread by a not surprizingly good bunch of guys …ok…ok… Lex Lugs and Lex Babes ( they know who they are) and reaffirms my decision to continue hanging around here …thanks again. Best
PS, I am pleased to announce that the supremely prestigous PedanticPeckerwood Award, for the first time since the beginning of the world , is being awarded jointly to Maj Mike and filterman…congradulations to both recipients.
You crack me up Snake!
Yep, Snake’s summation was more entertaining than the entire thread!
Just grateful that I wasn’t one of the receipients of the ever prestigous PendanticPeckerwood Award….
I second your notion, Michelle.
Gee Snake, I’m so honored by this PP Award I’m nearly speechless. But I realize I couldn’t have won it without some of the great support of others here. Thank you.
Now, as I was quibbling earlier…………..
Good sense of humor Filter… Now, let’s move on as friends.
A deal, Babs. Thanks.
I do have a tendency to get riled up occasionally. But I’ll try to keep it all in check a little better.
Fliterman, it was a great post and chock full of personal references. However, it did not address the point of my question — if people are underpaid, how can that be when the market decides salaries, and likewise how can the market take into account non-quantifiable assets like dedication to reward those who have earned it?
– Max
What can I say?…You Babes and Lugs inspire me. Best
PS, MaxD, old sport suggest you give it rest…it’s almost turkey day
that and the threat of an internet hug from FbL did it …
*taking the high road* I don’t recall
threateningpromising to hug anyone.*flounce*
FbL, Admit it, as a female and self styled non Lex Babe, you thrive/revel on such attention(s). Best
“I find it curious that the same predi[le]ctions that steered you left of center – politics junkie, book worm, history buff, science geek, economics dilettante,etc – had the reverse effect on me.
Perhaps I’m not doing it right…”
Well, one of us is decidedly going about it the wrong way; luckily it is impossible to know which.
MaxD – A good question. And your persistence eventually forces my answer.
The free market system based purely upon the supply and demand of available, qualified workers, while most always a predominant factor in any wage/salary determination; it is fortunately not the only factor. Nor should it be.
Indeed, it was the free market’s unregulated labor practices in the US at the turn of the last century that led to sweat shops, muckrakers, violent strikes, and robber barons. Things got ugly. Thankfully, during that century, and as a result of the many national labor movements, we moved well beyond a pure free market for labor. In doing so, we built a strong middle class of both productive workers and especially new consumers, who have since been the fuel for our robust and growing economy and the very keystone of our country’s affluence that benefits all.
Despite the large decline in labor unions over recent decades, those occupations most at risk of exploitation in a free market are still heavily unionized – i.e. many of the trades, transportation workers, and yes, teachers. Indeed, if only the free market were in play, private school teachers – many with better credentials – would not be paid less than public school teachers.
[Lawyers, although non-union, don't operate in the free market system of supply and demand either; they have their own system for well 'above-equilibrium' pay.]
To overcome the severe limitations of pure free market wages, it is often necessary for workers to tie their wages directly to the intrinsic value of the quality or quantity of one’s production. For teachers, this is difficult to do, and their wage/production-value disparity reflects this, unfortunately.
I have always maintained that if a worker is “overpaid”, the fault lies with the employer. However, if a worker is “underpaid”, the fault lies with the worker. (This often happens, despite free market influence.) And although heavily unionized, the fault of paltry pay for their valuable production lies with the teacher. Because of the love if not passion for their profession – something not as common in other professions – teachers are more easily exploited and willing to work for substandard pay. Moreover, teachers are less likely to strike for higher wages, as are the Teamsters or Auto Workers unions.
While I have a great deal of respect and support for the free market system, I also realize in the extreme it can have deleterious effects, and overwhelm other desirable and necessary, abstract concepts…. like appropriate pay for teachers.
How Does Teacher Pay Compare?
I wonder how you feel about teacher incentive pay? It always seemed like it’d be a wonderful way to reward those who were truly dedicated rather than mere time servers – they’re everywhere, you know – as well as encourge good behavior but it seems like the teachers’ unions are uniformly against the notion.
Sorry for the bad link. Here it is:
http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/books_teacher_pay
lex – Suffice it to say I have mixed emotions regarding incentive pay.
Generally and historically, most US labor unions have always been against incentive pay, while a majority of managements embrace the concept.
It can be a very controversial subject. Sorry, that’s about all I will say about it for now.
sorry i was late to the awards ceremony, but lunch ran a bit long. one might almost say i was chomping quite a bit.
be that as it may, for any commodity, (health insurance, teaching expertise), why would not the invisible hand cause the “best” provider of said commodity to garner the appropriate earnings for value provided? besides which, who in heck gave the {insert level} Gov’t the authority to be diddlin’ in such matters?
MajM – Well “Champ,” I’ll “chomp” on your question for a “bit.” (If you will pardon the puns.)
First, teachers are fortunately not commodities. They vary greatly in talent, training, and expertise from each other and from the general population. Otherwise, in a pure free market, they would all be paid the same, and much lower than they are now.
While the popularly referred to “invisible hand” of a free market promotes market eefficiency, it does not necessarily promote fairness. Other factors must be invoked in wage determination. An apparent economic wage and a fair wage are different animals.
Thank God the Gov’t does ‘diddle’ in such matters. A free market, while certainly desirable up to a point, creates a multitude of unintended consequences in the extreme, and when left to run unfettered. In fact, pure Capitalism can be nearly as destructive as pure Communism. Fortunately, we have evolved into a “mixed economy” with some limits and regulation that has improved our quality of life and the general wellbeing for a large majority of our citizens.
Now may we please let this thread die a belated and natural death, and let lex set the table of new issues?
Thread is dead. All hail the thread!
term life insurance price quote…
As texas dental insurance or plans related subjects continue to gain in popularity, there will be more locations to learn more about this interesting theme….