I agree with Paul Krugman that Romney/Ryan and the Republican party want to end Medicare. Some people, including some reputable journalism organizations, say that is a lie. But the plan they are putting forward for premium support (vouchers) will turn Medicare, which takes care of millions of seniors, into something that burdens all but the most wealthy seniors. Of course, this is consistent with most of Romney's ideas.
The plan is equivalent to 7-Eleven giving you a 24-ounce cup filled only with 9 ounces of ice and saying it is a Big Gulp.
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Money and meaning
There is a fascinating essay that appeared recently at the Harvard Business Review. It asks what many of us often wonder--how do we keep our society's obsession with money from ruining the things we value. And more importantly, how can those people who really add value to our lives be more fairly compensated so that we stop this mad rush to a winner-take-all economy.
Now I am a sports fan. And I think Derek Jeter should make as much or more than a Wall Street CEO. I know that very few people can hit a 95-mile-per-hour fastball 400 feet. Almost any of us could ruin the economy.
Seriously, I understand that high-paid athletes are the best at what they do, have a small window to earn money from their talents, and compete in what is an almost truly free market. So if billionaire owners want to pay them tens of millions of dollars a year, good for them.
However, we as tax payers should not participate in a broken market that values winning at sports more than making the world a better place. I am thinking about this because the Nobel prizes are being announced this week. So here is my simple proposal:
No single member of a coaching staff at a public university can earn more than the award for a Nobel Prize.
Now I know that the money is not the important part of winning a Nobel. Still, we are sending the wrong message to our students when we say we "value" a winning season more than an advance in physics or chemistry that will make all our lives better.
As citizens of a state (and some of my readers will, I hope, be legislators) we can demand this. It won't solve the huge problem of trading money for meaning, but it is a start.
Now I am a sports fan. And I think Derek Jeter should make as much or more than a Wall Street CEO. I know that very few people can hit a 95-mile-per-hour fastball 400 feet. Almost any of us could ruin the economy.
Seriously, I understand that high-paid athletes are the best at what they do, have a small window to earn money from their talents, and compete in what is an almost truly free market. So if billionaire owners want to pay them tens of millions of dollars a year, good for them.
However, we as tax payers should not participate in a broken market that values winning at sports more than making the world a better place. I am thinking about this because the Nobel prizes are being announced this week. So here is my simple proposal:
No single member of a coaching staff at a public university can earn more than the award for a Nobel Prize.
Now I know that the money is not the important part of winning a Nobel. Still, we are sending the wrong message to our students when we say we "value" a winning season more than an advance in physics or chemistry that will make all our lives better.
As citizens of a state (and some of my readers will, I hope, be legislators) we can demand this. It won't solve the huge problem of trading money for meaning, but it is a start.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)