Haiti and New Orleans
When I was 10 years old my family moved from Minnesota to California. The move was huge, but it caused me anxiety because I had watched television shows predicting the next big earthquake and California falling into the Pacific Ocean. Of course, that was more than 30 years ago, and California remains part of the continental United States. However, the residents of California live with the threat of earthquakes every day. Unlike any other natural disaster phenomena, I would conjecture an earthquake is the worst threat to face. Contrastingly, in Florida we have days, up to a week, to prepare for a hurricane. Tornadoes come with minutes of warning, or hours if paying attention to conditions. Even mudslides, floods, and fires provide a reasonable warning. An earthquake, on the other hand, comes any time and with no warning. If you live in California though, you know the threat exists. Living in Haiti on the other hand is a place with minimal earthquake risk.
Facing disaster is reasonable when you know what threat exists, or more importantly have time to prepare. When Katrina struck New Orleans warnings were issued ahead of time, the citizens had a choice to stay or leave. Of course, a weather forecast is never perfect, but with Katrina the severity of potential of the storm obviously loomed. In contrast, Haiti was struck by the worst earthquake in 200 years with no warning, and unlike California, no predisposition for the expectation of earthquakes. It appears Haiti’s government and communications infrastructure collapsed, not unlike the local resources of New Orleans and Louisiana. Immediately, Haiti reached out to its neighbors to seek help, and so did New Orleans. In both instances, massive federal aid packages were mobilized to assist.
News coverage of the events in Haiti has been compassionate and focused on the successes of rescue. In South Florida the media is providing local stories of airports launching relief, medical teams departing, and families reuniting. It is nearly impossible to turn on the television without a reference to the current situation in Haiti and how the citizens of the world are reaching out to their neighbors. Unfortunately, last week there was troubling coverage of gangs, violence, and looting. I found the similarities to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans striking in this regard. Sadly, there are people who disregard the brotherhood of man and instead take advantage of disaster and troubling times. Amplifying this situation is sensationalism by the press of the minority doing so. Bothersome as these situations are though, we should not be left with images of theft and violence, but focus on the success of rescue and efforts to help those in need.
However, the real story remains at the ground level, not from the massive organized efforts. The individual rescues, and thousands of examples of neighbor helping neighbor. The real survivors in Haiti are those helping, not seeking assistance or depending on a foreign nation to save the day. The real survivors understand their fate is up to them and do not blame anyone for the earthquake that struck. In contrast, the residents of New Orleans shunned personal responsibility, looked to blame others, and waited for someone to save them. Haiti’s earthquake is going to forever change the look of neighboring nations as its own people realize it will take decades to recover. As we watch from afar, I challenge you to examine your own preparedness for unforeseen disasters, and remind you to believe in the goodness of people helping people.
Showing posts with label Health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health care. Show all posts
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Merry Christmas from Congress
As the Christmas holiday comes upon us this week I feel compelled to take a look at our government and what has happened in the past year. Driving this is speculation over whether Senator Harry Reid will force a vote on healthcare Christmas Eve. Personally, I hope the vote is squashed, not because of my feelings on government run health care, but because of the actions and methods of this new Democratic Party run government.
I am concerned by the cloak of secrecy and selling votes to force healthcare to fruition. In contrast to Congress’ actions right now, I have had the opportunity to sit on several government boards in Florida and the “Sunshine Laws” have been drilled into me. On one hand they are frustrating as these laws regarding open, transparent government make it difficult to negotiate contracts, bid on projects, and protect the tax payer in some instances. But, this smaller issue is far outweighed by eliminating secrecy in government. Florida is renowned for putting a high priority on the public's right of access to governmental meetings and records. In fact, the principles of open government are not only embodied in Florida statutes, but also are guaranteed in the state Constitution.
Similar to the Sunshine Laws, President Obama proposed “Sunlight Before Signing” stating “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, I will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” However, this has been done far less than 50% of the time since taking office. Additionally, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously declared on September 24th she would make the healthcare bills available for review at least 72-hours prior to any votes, but as we know that was not the case. The American people learned how this new majority party government would work when the stimulus bill passed last spring was voted on without accommodation for members of Congress to read it, rushed through for signature, and even President Obama did not follow his own directive for “Sunlight Before Signing”.
Open government protects us, the citizens from potential tyranny by our elected officials. I am dismayed at closed-door meetings in Washington, the President calling members of a single party to the Whitehouse, or caucus meetings to promise hundreds of millions of dollars to a single congressional district or state. Sadly, at the national level straw polls are taken, potential votes counted, and strategies are determined to allow some members of congress to even vote “Nay” in an effort to protect them from political backlash over certain legislation. Thus, a bill may pass by the slimmest majority, but a majority nonetheless when a single party controls Congress; all in sharp contrast to Florida’s open government laws.
This week much political maneuvering regarding procedures will take place while most of us are distracted with holiday events. One must wonder why if the proposed healthcare bill is critical to one-sixth of our economy, our well-being, and best for the country then why must negotiation be done secretly. Like Santa Claus, the Senate will come together Christmas Eve to deliver the “gift” of healthcare over the objection of the majority of Americans.
As the Christmas holiday comes upon us this week I feel compelled to take a look at our government and what has happened in the past year. Driving this is speculation over whether Senator Harry Reid will force a vote on healthcare Christmas Eve. Personally, I hope the vote is squashed, not because of my feelings on government run health care, but because of the actions and methods of this new Democratic Party run government.
I am concerned by the cloak of secrecy and selling votes to force healthcare to fruition. In contrast to Congress’ actions right now, I have had the opportunity to sit on several government boards in Florida and the “Sunshine Laws” have been drilled into me. On one hand they are frustrating as these laws regarding open, transparent government make it difficult to negotiate contracts, bid on projects, and protect the tax payer in some instances. But, this smaller issue is far outweighed by eliminating secrecy in government. Florida is renowned for putting a high priority on the public's right of access to governmental meetings and records. In fact, the principles of open government are not only embodied in Florida statutes, but also are guaranteed in the state Constitution.
Similar to the Sunshine Laws, President Obama proposed “Sunlight Before Signing” stating “Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, I will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.” However, this has been done far less than 50% of the time since taking office. Additionally, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi famously declared on September 24th she would make the healthcare bills available for review at least 72-hours prior to any votes, but as we know that was not the case. The American people learned how this new majority party government would work when the stimulus bill passed last spring was voted on without accommodation for members of Congress to read it, rushed through for signature, and even President Obama did not follow his own directive for “Sunlight Before Signing”.
Open government protects us, the citizens from potential tyranny by our elected officials. I am dismayed at closed-door meetings in Washington, the President calling members of a single party to the Whitehouse, or caucus meetings to promise hundreds of millions of dollars to a single congressional district or state. Sadly, at the national level straw polls are taken, potential votes counted, and strategies are determined to allow some members of congress to even vote “Nay” in an effort to protect them from political backlash over certain legislation. Thus, a bill may pass by the slimmest majority, but a majority nonetheless when a single party controls Congress; all in sharp contrast to Florida’s open government laws.
This week much political maneuvering regarding procedures will take place while most of us are distracted with holiday events. One must wonder why if the proposed healthcare bill is critical to one-sixth of our economy, our well-being, and best for the country then why must negotiation be done secretly. Like Santa Claus, the Senate will come together Christmas Eve to deliver the “gift” of healthcare over the objection of the majority of Americans.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Cruise Ships
One of the highlights of a cruise ship trip to the Bahamas is a visit to the local market. Some bargaining will take place; you will feel good about your purchase, getting a great price, and the vendor will have sold one of his wares. This system works and has stood the test of time because there are no price floors or ceilings.
For example if I want to buy a handmade blanket for $20 in the above example with a little negotiating I can buy the blanket for $16. Still not comfortable with the price, I can walk away and the vendor will make a finally offer of $14. Because I know there are three other vendors selling similar, not necessarily the same, blankets nearby I can refuse the offer. Both of us are free to negotiate, up or down, in this scenario. I can pay $14, the vendor can lower his price to $13, or the deal can come to an end.
What would happen if the cruise ship company decided to check each vendor to ensure they were worthy, provide them perks, and guarantee a certain number of customers each day or pay him for any lost business? Furthermore, the cruise ship company agrees they will take $5 from each vendor to guarantee these benefits. In this case, the vendor will be reluctant to freely negotiate; he knows there are additional costs involved in the transaction. And, he also knows the cruise ship will pay him for any lost customers. Suddenly, his willingness to negotiate has been eroded by the establishment of a floor (guaranteed minimum) of business by the cruise ship company.
We can further complicate this scenario by supposing the cruise ship company requires the vendor to charge no more than$15 per blanket for anyone over 62 years old. Of course, people over 62 have much more free time and travel much more because they are large consumers of the cruise ship company’s services and this perk helps the company attract more clients. However, the unintended consequence of this idea is the vendor loses revenue because his costs have not changed but yet he cannot charge more than $15 per blanket to those over 62. Thus, when I approach him, at age 42, his willingness to negotiate with me has been eroded further and I am forced to pay $20 or $21 for the blanket. Throughout the bazaar this is the case because all of the vendors are forced by the cruise ship company to charge less for blankets to older people, and pay the $5 fee (tax) for benefits and perks.
Free markets will work without a problem when left alone as they have for thousands of years. Buyers will always get the lowest price and sellers will maximize profits. Unfortunately, intervention by a single entity can have huge impacts within the market. The same is true in the current health care insurance debate or any other part of our economy where the government injects monies. Anytime this happens one group of individuals will benefit while the rest of the population pays more and subsidizes false market forces. The most recent example was the catastrophic failure and unintended consequences of “cash for clunkers”. As reported, dealers did not come down on prices because the consumer was subsidized by tax payers to take home a car, not to negotiate. Ironically, the biggest beneficiary of this program was foreign labeled dealers, thus monies were artificially transferred via the program to foreign corporations that benefited from the spike in sales.
Copyright (c) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.
One of the highlights of a cruise ship trip to the Bahamas is a visit to the local market. Some bargaining will take place; you will feel good about your purchase, getting a great price, and the vendor will have sold one of his wares. This system works and has stood the test of time because there are no price floors or ceilings.
For example if I want to buy a handmade blanket for $20 in the above example with a little negotiating I can buy the blanket for $16. Still not comfortable with the price, I can walk away and the vendor will make a finally offer of $14. Because I know there are three other vendors selling similar, not necessarily the same, blankets nearby I can refuse the offer. Both of us are free to negotiate, up or down, in this scenario. I can pay $14, the vendor can lower his price to $13, or the deal can come to an end.
What would happen if the cruise ship company decided to check each vendor to ensure they were worthy, provide them perks, and guarantee a certain number of customers each day or pay him for any lost business? Furthermore, the cruise ship company agrees they will take $5 from each vendor to guarantee these benefits. In this case, the vendor will be reluctant to freely negotiate; he knows there are additional costs involved in the transaction. And, he also knows the cruise ship will pay him for any lost customers. Suddenly, his willingness to negotiate has been eroded by the establishment of a floor (guaranteed minimum) of business by the cruise ship company.
We can further complicate this scenario by supposing the cruise ship company requires the vendor to charge no more than$15 per blanket for anyone over 62 years old. Of course, people over 62 have much more free time and travel much more because they are large consumers of the cruise ship company’s services and this perk helps the company attract more clients. However, the unintended consequence of this idea is the vendor loses revenue because his costs have not changed but yet he cannot charge more than $15 per blanket to those over 62. Thus, when I approach him, at age 42, his willingness to negotiate with me has been eroded further and I am forced to pay $20 or $21 for the blanket. Throughout the bazaar this is the case because all of the vendors are forced by the cruise ship company to charge less for blankets to older people, and pay the $5 fee (tax) for benefits and perks.
Free markets will work without a problem when left alone as they have for thousands of years. Buyers will always get the lowest price and sellers will maximize profits. Unfortunately, intervention by a single entity can have huge impacts within the market. The same is true in the current health care insurance debate or any other part of our economy where the government injects monies. Anytime this happens one group of individuals will benefit while the rest of the population pays more and subsidizes false market forces. The most recent example was the catastrophic failure and unintended consequences of “cash for clunkers”. As reported, dealers did not come down on prices because the consumer was subsidized by tax payers to take home a car, not to negotiate. Ironically, the biggest beneficiary of this program was foreign labeled dealers, thus monies were artificially transferred via the program to foreign corporations that benefited from the spike in sales.
Copyright (c) 2009 John R. Nelson. All Rights Reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)