We can’t talk

We can't talk. Or, rather, we can only talk in canned narratives, as Glenn C. Loury writes in the NYT:

[T]his convenient story line is reflected in an all-too-familiar narrative: “Here we are, 45 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, with a black man in the White House. And yet, it is still the case that a distinguished Harvard professor, standing on his own front step, can be treated like a common criminal simply because he’s black. Obviously it is way too soon to declare that we have entered a post-racial era ... .” As far as I am concerned, the ubiquity of this narrative shows that we are incapable of talking straight with one another about race. And this much-publicized incident is emblematic of precisely nothing at all. Rather, the Gates arrest is a made-for-cable-TV tempest in a teapot.
Therefore, as many people use the Gates incident to teach lessons about race, the reality is that objective people are left to wonder whether the case was about race at all.

Continue ReadingWe can’t talk

Bicycling and finding balance in the rules of the road

Via Daily Dish, here is a well written post from Steamboats are Ruining Everything regarding:

My principle became, roughly speaking, bike in such a way that even relatively inattentive drivers can be expected to see you and know what you’re going to do next. Also: don't be annoying to pedestrians. I began halting at red lights and stop signs. (Later I relaxed this somewhat, almost to Idaho rules.) I made sure to bike in the bike lane, if there was one (or on the outer edge of it, if biking inside it was going to put me within swinging distance of the opening doors of parked cars). I stayed off sidewalks. And I never, ever biked the wrong way down a one-way street.
Since having this epiphany, "Steamboats" has loosened up a bit, including his approval of the “stop as yield” law used in Idaho. I admit that I rarely stop at stopsigns such that my feet both come to the ground. At 1 am, I don't sit there waiting for the light to change. On a particularly dangerous overpass, I ride on a sidewalk for a quarter-mile. On the other hand, I am aggravated by the bicycle riding behavior of many riders because it is so often dangerous, not because it's a violation of a law. So often, when you see a cyclist violating a law, he or she is simultaneously breaking five laws. The person I have in mind is the wrong-way rider who violates a stoplight in the dark without any bicycle light, while not wearing a helmet, while failing to signal.

Continue ReadingBicycling and finding balance in the rules of the road

What IS that new health care system that we are arguing about?

I've been wondering about this for months. What IS the new health care system that we are arguing about? How can I know if I'm for it or against it until I know what it is? That was one of the topics Bill Moyers discussed with his guests, Trudy Lieberman, director of the health and medical reporting program at the CUNY Graduate School of Journalism, and Marcia Angell, senior lecturer in social medicine at Harvard Medical School and former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine.

TRUDY LIEBERMAN: [Barack Obama] has essentially advocated is throwing more money into the current system. He's treating the symptom and he's not treating the underlying cause of our problem. Our problem is that we spend two and a half times as much per person on health care as other advanced countries, the average of other advanced countries. And we don't get our money's worth. So, now he says, okay, this is a terribly inefficient, wasteful system. Let's throw some money into it . . . Into the same system. That's his problem. The other problem, in the press conference, was that he was trying to mobilize public support for a bill, and we don't know what that bill is.
Here's a big problem with the current system:
MARCIA ANGELL: Well, that goes to the cause of the problem. We are the only advanced country in the world that has chosen to leave health care to the tender mercies of a panoply of for-profit businesses, whose purpose is to maximize income and not to provide health. And that's exactly what they do.
Angell then strongly states that the system that Obama is apparently pushing doesn't change this sad situation, even though 2/3 of Americans prefer the Canadian-style single payor system. Is Obama going to change health care for the better? Angell says she's not optimistic:
But what I would say this time around, and now I am going to be very pessimistic, Bill. This time around, I don't think it's going to happen because of the power the pharmaceutical and insurance lobbies. I don't think it's going to happen. But I would rather see Obama go down fighting for something coherent and practical that the public could mobilize behind, than go down fighting for this amorphous plan that tries to keep these private insurance industry in place . . . Well, he will have to fight . . . I think he'll go down. I don't think he's grasped the nettle. And I don't think that even the best of the proposals that he is considering are going to be effective. And I worry about even the public option, because the power of the insurance industry is so great that I believe that they would use their clout in Congress to hobble the public option in some way.
What's the only solution? Angell says it forcefully:
I think we have to go for a single payer system. You could institute that gradually. You could do it state by state. You could do it decade by decade. You could improve Medicare. That is, make it nonprofit. But extend it down to age 55 and age 45 and age 35. It would give the private insurance industry a chance to go into hurricanes, earthquakes or something. To get out of the health business. It could be done gradually. I think that has to be done. And it's the only thing that can be done.
As always, Bill Moyers and his guests give you details and arguments that you won't find in most news sources.

Continue ReadingWhat IS that new health care system that we are arguing about?

U.S. visitor to Cuba begs to be arrested, but no dice

This from MSNBC: A U.S. citizen trying to challenge the ban on travel to Cuba on Friday bemoaned his inability to get arrested or cited — even after having his passport stamped in Havana and bringing back Cuban memorabilia.

And why is it, again, that we have an official ban on travel to Cuba? Are we afraid that we'll be attacked by Cuba? I know that we're edging toward easing up on that travel, but why not just get rid of the ban.

Continue ReadingU.S. visitor to Cuba begs to be arrested, but no dice

This is why I don’t enjoy the though of going to city council meetings

Have you ever gone to a local government meeting where citizen input was invited and it made you wonder about whether democracies are good ideas? As I watched this woman's speech (to the Santa Cruz California City Council) on Reddit.com, I wondered whether it would ever occurred to her that she'd be more effective if she had command of any facts or if she performed a coherent analysis before standing up and talking. I don't mean to pick on her too harshly. She seems sincere. This does remind me of many government meetings where ill-informed citizens dominate. This is the price to pay, though, if you want to give well-informed citizens a chance to talk too. These are only excerpts from the woman's full speech. Therefore, this a very patient city council, indeed.

Continue ReadingThis is why I don’t enjoy the though of going to city council meetings