In his recent New York Times Magazine piece (“The Rise and Fall of GDP,” May 10, 2010), Jon Gertner aptly navigates the divergent–and often competing–interests involved in the debate over GDP.
Reaction to our latest report “A Century Apart” has been lively, with pieces in the Wall Street Journal online, the Star Ledger, and the Philadelphia Inquirer, as well as on ABC World News Tonight. Many readers have responded with thought-provoking comments. By far the greatest volume of feedback was generated by David Brooks’ May 4th column, “The Limits of Policy,” which discussed some of the report’s findings in detail and offered his views as to what fuels the gaps between different groups of Americans.
After a year of vociferous debate, health care reform passed. But the unprecedented attention to Americans’ health somehow managed to miss one of the country’s most alarming health problems: the huge disparities in health outcomes for different population groups.
Healthcare Doesn’t Have to Cost an Arm and a Leg: 29 Reasons for Optimism from Comparisons between Countries and U.S. States
Months of bare-knuckled wrangling over health care reform have given rise to a widespread view that there’s nothing on which Democrats and Republicans can agree. But there is one: politicians on both sides of the aisle agree that health care is far too expensive. And they’re right. Total public and private health spending in 2009 was almost $2.5 trillion. In the next hour, the nation will spend $280 million on our health.
But policy makers and everyday Americans alike have reason to be optimistic that dramatically lower costs are possible.
During a meeting this summer between President Obama and governors sympathetic to his healthcare agenda, the President urged them to avoid using the word “rationing.” For many, the word conjures up specters of long waits or limits on individual choice. Others worry it could move medical or life-and-death decisions away from the family. But what is lost in this fear of rationing, and attempts to mute the word, is the fact that we are already rationing.
Stop five men and five women on the street outside an elementary school and ask them the shoe size of their youngest child, or the phone number of that child’s pediatrician. Odds are, the women will know both, the men neither. Much ink is being spilled lately to probe the findings of the University of Pennsylvania study on “The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness,” which found that women today are unhappier than women were in the past – and also less happy than men are. Our research on human development offers a few clues.
As often happens, the just-completed Pittsburgh G-20 meeting ended with admirable pronouncements, among them, the “responsibility to invest in people by providing education, job training, decent work conditions, health care…and to fight poverty, discrimination, and all forms of social exclusion”. But with the near-exclusive use of GDP growth as the central measure of societal success, we risk falling short of these lofty goals by a long shot.
GDP an Inaccurate Measure of Stark Disparities in United States, Fails to Show Whole Picture in Louisiana
When Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Mississippi and Louisiana four years ago, extreme weather and acute human vulnerability met head-on with tragic results. Long-standing gaps in the well-being of different groups of Gulf coast residents were suddenly everywhere in evidence – on rooftops, on I-10 overpasses, and on TV screens across the country. Many were stunned by what they saw. They should not have been. The problems of social exclusion, residential segregation, and human poverty that Katrina brought to light hide in plain sight in every U.S. state.
Recent Economix posts have referred to the work of the American Human Development Project in discussions centering on the value of the human development index. The folks at Economix have kindly given us an opportunity to share some of our findings.
A new tool that our organization, the American Human Development Project, developed with United Way illustrates in very concrete terms the nature and extent of the costs we all pay for the terrible inequities that characterize our educational system — the Common Good ForecasterTM. This online web tool uses the most recent official data available on U.S. states and counties to put a human face on the effects of decisions we make as a society. It offers a snapshot of educational outcomes in our communities today and paints a picture of a different tomorrow.