It’s time to start paying as we go

I would think that the economic collapse of the United States has clearly demonstrated that the "free market" is not benevolent when those holding great power in society are not benevolent. Consequently, the best way to run society is to use government to make sure that powerful interests don't run roughshod over regular folks. But what are the proper functions of government, to the extent that government works with markets to allocate goods and services? This question was addressed by economist Jeffrey Sachs in the May 2009 edition of Scientific American:

The reasons include the protection of the poor through a social safety net; the correction of externalities such as greenhouse gas emissions; the provision of "merit goods" such as healthcare and education that society deems to be essential for all its members; and the financing of scientific and technological research that cannot be efficiently captured by private investors. In all these circumstances, the free market system tends to under-provide the resource in question.

Sachs ends his article by indicating that there is no alternative to raising taxes to pay for the services Americans want and need. In particular, this year's deficit "will reach an astounding 1.7 5 trillion, or 12% of GDP." Further, the government debt held by the public will rise from 40% of GDP in 2008 to 65% of GDP in 2013. According to Sachs, this continued buildup of public debt "will threaten the well-being of our children and our children's children."

Continue ReadingIt’s time to start paying as we go

Think solar, U.S.

Scientific American has just published a comprehensive article on how to switch the United States substantially over to sunlight. The headline: "By 2050 solar power could end U.S. dependence on foreign oil and slash greenhouse gas emissions." The cost of this immense clean-energy-producing plan would be $420 billion. That's a HUGE…

Continue ReadingThink solar, U.S.

How to be happy

I often jump at the chance to report on new well-written articles regarding happiness, especially when they are based upon science rather than mere anecdotes.

Last year, I started a subscription to Scientific American Mind  It’s a well-written magazine that addresses lively and timely topics.  Be February-March 2007 issue contains an article entitled “Why It’s so Hard to Be Happy.” 

Why is it so hard?  After all (as the article points out), the buying power of average Americans has tripled since 1950, though we are not three times happier.  In fact, our children are more anxious.  Is happiness about achieving goals, for instance?  Apparently not.  The growing field of “positive psychology” shows that happiness

Is not something that can be achieved by hard work or good luck.  The happiest people seem to be those who are fully engaged in the present, rather than focused on future goals.

Evolutionary psychology suggests that humans have inherited “a remarkable capacity to habituate to, or become accustomed to, the status quo.”  While this is great when we are facing adverse conditions, it causes ongoing pleasant experiences to fade in the consciousness.  In fact, we seem to be especially well-tuned to notice dangers much more than pleasures. “The natural human condition is to take positive experiences for granted and to focus on the bothersome aspects of life.”  The article suggests that humans who were never satisfied had an survival advantage over their easily-satisfied peers. 

A twin study from 1996 indicates that 80% of the variation …

Share

Continue ReadingHow to be happy