The Health Care Reform Debate: Shame of a Superpower

by Nomad

It’s often asked how people can vote against their own best interests. As a social phenomena, this strange, pathetic quirk of democracy is being played out before our eyes in the healthcare debate. 

For a nation that once prided itself in being a leader among nations, with a system of governance to be admired and imitated, the whole thing has been one embarrassment after another.

First the good news.

According to provisions in the Affordable Care Act (ACA), better known as Obamacare, health insurers that covered large groups were required to spend at least 85 cents out of every dollar on medical care or “activities that improve health care quality.”

This provision became effective last year and its implementation is now producing real results. Insurers who spend more than allowed on expenses other than patient care will be required to compensate policy holders. Meaning, policyholders can expect to see a rebate check in the mail before August 1 2012. 

When the Supreme Court Struck Back at Roosevelt 2/2

NRA (National Recovery Administration) member: We Do Our Part (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

by Nomad

In the PART ONE, we examined the attempts by Franklin Roosevelt to develop a series of far-reaching social programs to get the American economy back on its feet. One of his many programs was the National Recovery Act, which attempted to restart and reform the industrial sector. Roosevelt sought to standardize manufacturing and labor by drafting a uniform code for all industries. It was a bold initiative.

The Case of Sick Chicken

Under the blanket codes of National Recovery Act (NRA), Brooklyn-based Schechter Poultry was found in violation of the industry codes for the poultry industry. The sixty charges against the retailer were later to be reduced to eighteen, and among those eighteen charges were "the sale to a butcher of an unfit chicken" and the sale of two un-inspected chickens.

The poultry industry in the 1930s had long been corrupted by gangsters and the Schetchers had struggled hard to evade “the rackets.” When the NRA was introduced, Joe Schechter joined in and displayed the blue eagle in his window. He had little interest in following the codes and it wasn’t long before inspectors found him out.

When the Supreme Court Struck Back at Roosevelt 1/2

by Nomad
In the past I have written about Roosevelt’s forgotten battle with the Supreme Court in 1933 but I’d like to return to this lost bit of history for a closer look. It isn’t all about our grandfather’s history because at this time, in these days prior to the Supreme Court ruling on the constitutionality of President Obama’s healthcare reform program, the parallels, I think, are striking. 

It isn’t the first time the executive and the judicial branches have been at loggerheads and perhaps lessons can be learned from history.

Action Now

The 1932 presidential election was not even close. President Herbert Hoover’s failed policies and his apparent detachment from the trials of his own people during the Great Depression won his few votes. At no time in American history had the conditions been quite as unforgiving as this and yet Hoover seemed out of touch with the average Americans. 

Like most economists of his age, Hoover on the other hand had warned against "mindless experimentation" in established government policy. He felt that the best policy was to wait things out, the national economy would recover on its own. It always had before.

Taken For Granted: Comparing a Week of Food Around the World

As our great-grandmothers used to tell us, "Waste not, want not." It's an idea that has vanished with the pocket watch and the Victrola. It's worth noting how much we in the West take for granted when it comes to food.

Too often we in the developed countries of the world forget how lucky actually are. Many of us cannot begin to imagine what it is like not to live in a land of plenty. It's easy to do if you have never been hungry.
And because we tend to take things for granted, we become part of the problem. 

Take food and how we waste it.

According to a 2013 report by the National Resources Defense Council, the average American tosses about 25 percent of food and beverages purchased. For a family of four, the money wasted could total from $1,365 to $2,275. Food spending as a percentage of the overall budget has decreased dramatically over the last few decades, but it’s still the third-largest expense for a household.

The organization also points out that feeding the U.S. population requires an enormous amount of land and resources. When the resources to grow that food are considered, this amounts to approximately 25 percent of all freshwater, 4 percent of the oil we consume, and more than $165 billion dollars all dedicated to producing food that never gets eaten.

Clearly as population in developing countries continue to grow, there will be a limit to how much can be produced 

The photos below are from the book "Hungry Planet: What the World Eats" by Peter Menzel and Faith D'Aluisio, a photographic study of families from around the world, revealing what people eat during the course of one week.

Each family's profile includes a detailed description and how much was spend every week. It's a truly eye-opening examination of human life on Earth, isn't it?

The March of the Bonus Army- Washington, June 1932

by Nomad

The story of the Bonus March on Washington in the summer of 1932 isn't as famous as it should be. Here's a post about the protests and how they were ended by brute force.

Where the March Began

The 1932 march of the Bonus Army has largely been forgotten by the public. The reason for this collective amnesia is perhaps easy to understand. Details about why it started and how it ended do not fit in well with how we Americans think of themselves and our country. Moreover, a few of the people of we think of as heroes today played less than heroic roles in the affair.

The origins of the march began much earlier than 1932. They can be traced back to the days after the Armistice of the First World War. Returning veterans came home and were dismayed to learn of the differences between their wages compared to those in the civilian branch of the selective service. State-side draftees made quite a bit more than those that had actually fought and risked their lives. The war veterans demanded that some kind of compensations be paid for their lost income. During those boom years, Congress tended to agree.