The high school I went to was John F. Kennedy, where the mascot was a leprechaun and the nickname for the sports teams was the Fighting Irish.  The “branding” and the fight song were all University of Notre Dame ripoffs.  I also seem to recall some Boston Celtics influence on the logo front.  I never thought about it being offensive.

Fast forward a few years when in my consumer behaviour course {text was by William Wilkie}, I read about the policy implications of sports marketing, particularly when it came to using Native American tribes as mascots.  This week, the decision of whether the current nickname for the University of North Dakota will continue to be The Fighting Sioux was extended for 30-60 days by the North Dakota state Board of Higher Education.  This will allow the university to get the opinion of the the state’s two tribes, as per the NCAA mandate that says that they cannot hold postseason events without approval of the tribes, after deeming the nickname “hostile and offensive.”

Proponents say the name honors the tribes and are an important part of the school’s tradition.  On ESPN, a university official did everything possible to state the university position is whatever the tribes and the Board of Higher Education decides, while an activist stated that all tribes in all states where Sioux people reside should have a say.

The Stanford {Leland Stanford Jr. University} nickname was the Indians until 1972, when, after protest, it was changed to the Cardinal, for the colour, not the bird.  The mascot went from Prince Lightfoot to the Stanford Tree, but not overnight. The tree was a mascot candidate offered by the Stanford band in 1975, although it did not win a student referendum that allowed suggestions that year.  According to Wikipedia::

“The 1975 vote included new suggestions, many alluding to the industry of the school’s founder, railroad tycoon Leland Stanford — the Robber Barons, the Sequoias, the Trees, the Cardinals, the Railroaders, the Spikes, and the Huns. The Robber Barons won, but the university’s administration refused to implement the vote.”

Ah, so much for campus democracy.  This reminds me of the server of my first web URL at UC Irvine:: “avarice.gsm.uci.edu”

I guess I’m not a stickler for tradition.  I’ve gone to schools where the nicknames were Ducks and Anteaters.  {As an aside, I do believe the Stanford “tree” is still banned from Autzen Stadium at the University of Oregon for a spotted owl skit in the 1990s.  Oregon was/is logging country.}  If the mascots were changed, so be it.  I must admit I would think it was pretty funny if Stanford did become the Robber Barons.  That said, changing a nickname or a mascot on the basis that it offends a group doesn’t bother me at all.  I can see how this is a clash of meaning systems.

So, is this no big whoop or is the NCAA imposing an overly politically correct culture on collegiate America?

Twitterversion:: Univ.N.Dakota Fightng Sioux mascot mght go the way of the dodo.Ovrly PC #NCAA or are times just a changin’? #ThickCulture http://url.ie/2k0e @Prof_K

Songs:: Smells Like Teen Spirit – Paul Anka

Mighty Oregon – Fight On: The Greatest College

The Sightline Institute has reports and maps on sustainable regional development.  They have a Cascadia Scorecard that tracks cities along seven key dimensions:: health, economy, population, energy, sprawl, wildlife, and pollution.

“The Scorecard’s target measurement for sprawl is 64 percent of a metropolitan area’s urban and suburban residents living in transit-friendly, walkable neighborhoods. That was the average for Vancouver, BC, Canada as of 2001 — the most recent data that was available when the Cascadia Scorecard was launched in 2004.   Vancouver has the best smart-growth record among Cascadian cities. In fact, it has the most compact urban structure of any of the 19 cities Sightline has analyzed to date.”

Here is a summary of research on British Columbia.  I was in Vancouver, BC this past May and I can attest to the fact that it is a very walkable city.  One of the things I look at in cities is how geography shapes growth, such as mountains and bodies of water.  Steep mountains, Burrard Inlet, and the Fraser River have all played a role in resisting the pressure for widespread sprawl.  In the lower mainland area of British Columbia, where Vancouver is, policies are in place to protect farmland and to channel development.

Twitterversion:: @Sightline Institute has great resources for understanding sustainable develment w/studies of #Cascadia. http://url.ie/2jde  #ThickCulture @Prof_K

Song:: Atmosphere – Pink Mountaintops {Vancouver, BC, CA}

See update below on LA District Attorney, Steve Cooley-30 September 2009 11:25 PDT.

First off, my opinion is that director Roman Polanski is guilty of rape, a rape that took place in 1977.  A few days ago, he was arrested in Switzerland, after police there were tipped off by US authorities.  Here’s an overview::

Over on the Salon.com broadsheet, Kate Harding wants us all to remember that Roman Polanski raped a child.  I often take issue with Salon, as several times in the past they have used gender as a wedge issue, intentionally framing things so as to stir controversy.  In this case, Harding wants the Polanski case reduced to one note:: child rapist.  While this may strengthen the emotional impact of her argument, it negates and dilutes the complexity of the situation and how others involved need to be held accountable for their actions that have led us to this point.

Those wanting the lurid details can easily find them online thanks to the prosecution, so I won’t go over those here.  I will state what Polanski was initially charged with back in 1977::

“rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor.”

The prosecution, stating they wanted to spare the the girl the trauma of having to go through a trial, offered a plea bargain, where Polanski copped to the charge of ::

“engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.”

So, why did he flee the country and avoid extradition back to the US for over 30 years?

Allegedly, word got out that the media hungry judge, Laurence J. Rittenband, the “judge to the stars,” was getting a sense that the public would be outraged by this plea deal and was set to throw the book at Polanski.  Polanski fled.  This judge later went on record stating that he would stay on the bench until Polanski was returned.  That didn’t happen.  He retired from the bench in 1989 and died of cancer in 1993.  When he retired, he quoted Gilbert and Sullivan stating, “I got him [Polanski] on my list.”  {Don’t get me started on crank judges quoting showtunes and Shakespeare.}  Now, echoing those statements, Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley wants justice to be done::

“He received a very, very, very lenient sentence back then, which would never be achievable under today’s laws, and we’ll see what the court wants to do in terms of the sentence and the parameters within the case settlement they had back then.”

First off, one has to be suspect of the political motives for a DA to go after such a high-profile figure, which is reminiscent of the book/film, Bonfire of the Vanities. It seems odd to suddenly be going after a 75 year old fugitive from justice.

Update:: I have found out that Steve Cooley is on his third term as District Attorney.  He will likely be seeking another term in 2012, after successfully blocking a referendum instituting term limits for the office. – more background

I think there are more dangerous criminals who, I’m just throwing this out there, are in the LA area that pose a greater threat.  So, I find this to be a curious “triaging” of pressing cases by Cooley.  Moreover, Cooley has allowed lurid details to get out and the victim herself just wants the matter dropped ::

“[The District Attorney] has, yet one more time, given great publicity to the lurid details of those events for all to read again…True as they may be, the continued publication of those details causes harm to me, my beloved husband, my three children and my mother…I have become a victim of the actions of the district attorney.”

She received a civil settlement from him and just wants to go on with her life.

Harding in Salon will have none of that::

“Shouldn’t we be honoring her wishes above all else?

In a word, no. At least, not entirely. I happen to believe we should honor her desire not to be the subject of a media circus, which is why I haven’t named her here, even though she chose to make her identity public long ago. But as for dropping the charges, Fecke [a blogger] said it quite well: ‘I understand the victim’s feelings on this. And I sympathize, I do. But for good or ill, the justice system doesn’t work on behalf of victims; it works on behalf of justice.'”

Really.  In the same article she reminds us::

“Regardless of whatever legal misconduct might have gone on during his trial, the man admitted to unlawful sex with a minor.”

So, legal misconduct doesn’t factor into justice.  This isn’t a cafeteria where one can choose aspects of the case to embrace or ignore and legal misconduct sure factors into the appeal process.  So, those hoping for a Polanski extradition should be cautious of what they wish for.  It begs the question, is this really about justice or is it about vengeance and retribution?  What precisely is the difference in a sociocultural sense of US values?  How does this relate to the feminism{s} of today?

I’m far from a Polanski apologist, but I do care about how the system of jurisprudence operates.  I dislike the reduction of complexity to catchy and emotion-stirring soundbites and I think its irresponsible and short-sighted.  I’m not for glossing over his crimes, but how about holding the judge and prosecution responsible for letting things get to this point and treading cautiously given the implications of stirring up a flawed case, despite slam-dunk evidence.  Let’s think about what was proper and improper outside of the bedroom, but in the courtroom.

Twitterversion:: #RomanPolanski faces extradition to US for sentencing of 1977 rape, but what are the stakes for due process? @Prof_K

Song:: Desperate Danger – Pray For Polanski

Notes from north of 49ºN

In the Twittersphere, this Ottawa Citizen article on green stimulus has been going around, based on a forthcoming UN report.  While 15% of the $3.1T in global stimulus investments are green, Canada, under the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper is lagging behind {See data below the jump}, barely in the top 10 in amount spent and percentage of green stimulus.  South Korea is leading the way, in terms of both amount spent and percent of stimulus spending, while the US is third in total green stimulus spending.  Not surprising, given news reports up in Canada::

“A common theme, though, appears to be a series of delays in approvals and disbursements, with less than one-quarter likely to be spent in 2009.”

The UN report recommends that G20 countries increase the rates of investments in green infrastructure and stimulus.  Five key areas for focus were identified::

1. energy efficiency in old and new buildings
2. renewable energy technologies such as wind power
3. sustainable transport technologies such as hybrid vehicles or high-speed rail
4. global ecological infrastructure such as forests
5. sustainable agriculture

I haven’t crunched any numbers, but looking at the list, I think there’s an interaction effect with policy support of green initiatives and clusterings of firms with green innovation strategies.  One of the questions I had is whether, thus far, is the idea that “green” is viewed as a luxury.  While imperfect, I wanted to see the relationship between richer nations {higher GDP per capita} and investment in green stimulus {per capita}.  I crunched these numbers (below the jump, with the GDP data taken from the IMF 2008 data}.  While there are not enough data points to make strong inferences about the data relationship, the following graph tells a story.  South Korea skews the curve::

Taking the US & South Korea out, increases in green stimulus increases at a decreasing rate with respect to higher levels of GDP::

So, looking at the data, South Korea and China are investing in green technologies, despite having lower average national incomes.  It would be interesting to monitor which technologies are being invested in the various countries and track the outcomes.  Canada should heed what’s going on, as they try to shift towards innovation and away from natural resource extraction.

Twitterversion:: #PMHarper’s #Canada lagging #G20 in green stimulus innov. spendng. Richer tend2 spend+, but China& S.Korea making a play. http://url.ie/2ihx @Prof_K

Song:: Everythings Gone Green (Edit) – New Order

Tale of the Green Stimulus Tape

Percentage of stimulus dedicated to green spending:

1. South Korea 79%

2. China 34%

3.Australia 21%

4. France 18%

5. Britain 17%

6. Germany 13%

7. United States 12%

8. South Africa 11%

9. Mexico 10%

10. Canada 8%

11. Spain 6%

12. Japan 6%

13. Italy 1%

Green stimulus per capita:

(U.S. dollars)

1. South Korea $1,238

2. Australia $420

3. United States $365

4. Japan $282

5. Germany $168

6. China $166

7. France $94

8. Britain $84

9. Canada $77

10. Italy $22

11. Spain $18

12. South Africa $16

13. Mexico $7

On the UC Berkeley campus, the Center for Open Innovation is doing work in this interesting new area::

“Open innovation is the use of purposive inflows and outflows of knowledge to accelerate internal innovation, and expand the markets for external use of innovation, respectively. [This paradigm] assumes that firms can and should use external ideas as well as internal ideas, and internal and external paths to market, as they look to advance their technology.”

Henry Chesbrough, Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm

In a recent talk, part of the discussion was on innovation and how it related to higher education.  There was talk of “silos” of knowledge.  So, when students are taking courses, they specialize in tracks, in terms of a functional area like finance or a specific type of engineering.  The problem with this is that this may not be the best preparation for students to work in the area of innovation and I would extend this much more broadly.  In other words, universities should be preparing students to think and problem solve  innovatively.  My experience is that there is lip service paid to this, but what becomes the focus is instilling a corpus of knowledge.

Last spring, Mark C. Taylor created a firestorm of controversy by calling the university on the carpet as an antiquated institution…and graduate education as the “Detroit of higher learning”.  Oh, you didn’t hear about this? That’s because the controversy was mainly in the halls of acadème with the rest of the world marching on without missing a beat.  Nevertheless, Taylor brought up some excellent points, six key ones to be specific.  Two that struck me were revising the curriculum and abolishing departments.  His example on a focus on problems used “water”::

“Consider, for example, a Water program. In the coming decades, water will become a more pressing problem than oil, and the quantity, quality and distribution of water will pose significant scientific, technological and ecological difficulties as well as serious political and economic challenges. These vexing practical problems cannot be adequately addressed without also considering important philosophical, religious and ethical issues. After all, beliefs shape practices as much as practices shape beliefs.

A Water program would bring together people in the humanities, arts, social and natural sciences with representatives from professional schools like medicine, law, business, engineering, social work, theology and architecture. Through the intersection of multiple perspectives and approaches, new theoretical insights will develop and unexpected practical solutions will emerge.”

Many in the academy went ballistic, but often citing “pragmatics” that, to me, were often thinly veiled rationale for preserving extant institutional structures, power bases, and resource allocations.  In a Kuhnian philosophy of science sense, there was a lot of clinging to the existing paradigms and the marginalization of any “crisis.”  There is a crisis.  It is one of relevance.

Open innovation is a new paradigm that’s focused on problems.  If I looked back on labels that have been used to describe my work, it includes marketing, branding, Internet marketing, economic sociology, and social media.  A common theme is “technology & media,” which in my mind defines a particular paradigm examining the intersection of both, which encompasses the humanities, the social sciences, the professional disciplines, and the applied technological.  If I had my druthers, courses would be less about checkboxes and more about developing and synthesizing knowledge structures.  Maybe life sciences with a lab could be substituted with a rigorous survey of the issues, challenges, and opportunities of bionanomedicine.

While paradigms and departments are both social constructions, they can be forced into an artificial structure or allowed to evolve organically…or even die.  I once sat in on a session where local employers close to a university I was working at stated what they wanted in an ideal undergraduate candidate.  There was a lot of passive reaction to what often boiled down to a desire for vocational education for job candidates.  Can students use the advanced features of Outlook or do a mail merge?  Please.  Universities need to redesign what they’re offering after reconceptualizing what they really are trying to do, knowledgewise, starting with the curriculum.  Over a decade ago, I was reading about differential perspectives on knowledge.  Some organizations treat employees {as repositories of knowledge} like stones in a wall to be built.  Others treat them like uniform bricks.  Universities play a role in this shaping.  Over the years, I grew weary of the pressures to create bricks and questioned the true utility of this.

I also think it’s time for universities to move away from churning out undergraduates, graduate, and professional students and become true fixtures of communities with a mission of serving lifelong learning–in the era of the free.

Twitterversion:: Innovation & innovative thinking in higher ed. Will knowledge “silos” persist & how will ivory tower adapt? http://url.ie/2i59 #ThickCulture @Prof_K

Song:: LITTLE BOXES – The Submarines

Notes from north of 49ºN, but at 37.9ºN at the moment.

Regular readers of ThickCulture will recall that I post quite a bit on the topic of Canada from an American expatriate perspective.  Way back in May, I blogged about attack ads being aimed at Liberal opposition leader, Michael Ignatieff, framing him as an outsider.  Recently, the Liberal Party of Canada has announced their intent to trigger the next election with a no-confidence vote in Parliament.  In preparation of this, The Liberals started advertising with spots featuring Ignatieff in a forest.  Earlier last week, the Globe & Mail tried to stir up controversy about Liberal Party of Canada ads featuring Michael Ignatieff in a possibly ersatz forest or a forest that cannot be readily identified.  Quite the sin in a timber-bearing land, eh Globe & Mail?

Here are the ads:: “Worldview” & “Jobs”

In my opinion, this constructed “scandal” is meant to stir the pot to get pageviews for the Globe & Mail by feeding the sentiments that somehow he is not as Canadian as everyone else and there is something less-than-authentic about him.  Perhaps this was borne out of the media frenzy over the Obama “birthers” movement.

Interestingly, in the French ads {I didn’t have time to translate the copy}, there is no forest and no guitar strumming in the background.  Just straightforward delivery::

Strategically, candidates need to think about creating a “positioning” strategy, where they create a meaning system in light of the competition.  With voter data on attitudes towards the political leaders {Harper-Conservative, Ignatieff-Liberal, Layton-NDP, Duceppe-Bloc, & May-Green}, multidimensional scaling can be used to try to create dimensions based on the attitudes and positions for each of the candidates along the dimensions.  Ideally, candidates differentiate themselves from the others on the basis of salient voter perceptions, i.e., tapping into the zeitgeist.  On my other blog, Rhizomicon, I did a post that talked about the increased fragmentation of the Canadian electorate.  While the Conservatives are in power with a plurality, my take is that there are several oppositional positions that are distinct and are differentiated from each other.  The question is whether the positions are salient and resonate with voters, which I think is a tough thing to accomplish in Canada these days.

The key issues now are economic, despite the Bank of Canada announcing the economy is turning the corner.  Crafting powerful messages that resonate on this would be no easy feat for any of the parties.  I think the look and feel of the Liberal Party French ad is more effective in conveying an “ominous” message.  As for the attack ads on Ignatieff, this could be dangerous in a politically fragmented environment, as there are already political faultlines along east-west lines.  A strategy framing Harper as fostering policies that are out of touch outside of the West could erode Conservative support.  Ironically, Harper coined the term “Bloc Anglais” to characterize Jack Layton of the NDP, but that same term could be applied to the particular {Reform Party style} conservatism Alberta and parts of interior BC.

So, what’s next?  Maybe Ignatieff’s a robot from outer space…

Twitterversion:: Globe&Mail strts contrvrsy w/ #Ignatieff in forest ads,but how2frame #CanPoli parties givn fragmntd polity? #ThickCulture http://url.ie/2gxo @Prof_K

Song:: Yoshimi Battles The Pink Robots Pt.1 – The Flaming Lips

The New York Times has an article on doing something about the Internet as the scourge of the workplace, being a timesuck of epic proportions.

“During the last few weeks, I’ve been using a slate of programs to tame these digital distractions. The apps break down into three broad categories. The most innocuous simply try to monitor my online habits in an effort to shame me into working more productively. Others reduce visual bells and whistles on my desktop as a way to keep me focused.

And then there are the apps that really mean business — they let me actively block various parts of the Internet so that when my mind strays, I’m prohibited from giving in to my shiftless ways. It’s the digital equivalent of dieting by locking up the refrigerator and throwing away the key.”

The author goes on to talk about the various software solutions, but at the end he surmises that it’s human nature to goof off and waste time.

Why?

Michel deCerteau in The Practice of Everyday Life offers up the term, “la perruque,” where workers steal time for their own purposes as a form of resistance to the surveillance of control::

“It differs from absenteeism in that the worker is officially on the job.  La perruque may be as simple a matter as a secretary’s writing a love letter on ‘company time’ or as complex as a cabinetmaker’s ‘borrowing’ a lathe to make a piece of furniture for his living room.”

This probably rings true for many::

In my opinion, people engage in la perruque in resisting the logics of surveillance, but I feel this could be thwarted by developing organizational cultures where people feel motivated to do the work, rather than slack.  In this day and age, employees are often made to feel they are lucky to even have a job and this was before the recession.  Outsourcing and cost-cutting are terms used to “manage” the workforce through fear.  The problem with fear…is that it breeds more resistance.  A vicious cycle.

This is why I always allow students to use laptops in my classes and I don’t even care if they’re updating their Facebook or playing poker.  Why?  Because if I’m doing my job and engaging the students, they wind up using the Internet to complement class discussions, not as a distraction.

Now that I’m a consultant doing my own thing, I find that I still waste time on the Internet.  If it increases, I suppose it’s because I have a jerk for a boss.

Twitterversion:: NewSftware prevnts timesink w/Internet,but is wastng time just”la perruque”by deCerteau. Contrlvs.Motivate?#ThickCulture http://url.ie/2gx8 @Prof_K

Song:: Temptation – Heaven 17

In 1987, ABC launched an hour-long drama called thirtysomething that featured baby-boomers settling down, raising kids, being a part of the establishment, etc.  You know, from fighting “the man” to becoming “the man.”  Part of the storyline was two male friends, Michael and Elliot, working in advertising and sometimes having to deal with their values conflicting with capitalism.  In this episode, the guys, who had their own small agency that went under, are hired by a large agency with a boss {Miles Drentel} who has a penchant for not-so-subtle digs.  This is a long clip, the first 10 minutes of a 1989 episode, “New Job,” airdate:: 11 April.  The whole episode is on this YouTube channel.

Fast forward twenty years and AMC launches Mad Men in 2007.  Unlike thirtysometing’s focus on current issues of values and ideals, Mad Men projects today’s issues in an older period.   The result is a well-polished show that uses the Cold War 1960s that predates the Civil Rights movement, the rise of feminism, and the call for gay rights.  Viewers get to gaze into the workplace with Foucauldian precision, where the official art of capitalism is created like so much sausage in a meat packing plant, in a workplace full of sex, alcohol, and cigarettes, not to mention the occasional firearm.

I take issues with some of the writing on the show, but that’s neither here nor there.  I will say there’s a certain cool detachment that the characters have, as they feed upon opportunism in the workplace, while creating cultural products {ads} that do the same.  On the show, Pete Campbell is a smarmy manor born WASP full of churlishness, ambition, and guile.  We aren’t supposed to like Pete, but it is Pete with his ambition fueling his desire to make a buck for his client who is willing to break the demographic colour barrier, as if he’s the Branch Rickey of advertising.

Here’s Pete, Paul Kinsey , and Harry Crane going over data and finding that urban blacks are buying Admiral TVs::

In the elevator, he does a bit of “qualitative research” by asking Hollis about his brand preferences::

Here’s Pete’s pitch to Admiral, complete with a framework for an “ethnic marketing” strategy::

The client is put off by this, reluctant to engage a strategy that would create black brand associations.  Pete is called on the carpet and Roger Sterling even goes as far to call him Martin Luther King {Jr.}.  This is a few episodes after Sterling donned blackface and sang “My Old Kentucky Home” at a Kentucky Derby party he was hosting::

So, Pete being the übercapitalist is lambasted for not understanding the realities of the economics of branding in the early 1960s.  The implication being “white flight” from the brand.

It is Lane Pryce, a British expatriate in New York, who is the only one besides Pete to see value in “ethnic marketing” strategies.  Pete serves as a metaphor for blind capitalism that serves to take everyone’s money equally.  An idealized capitalism of individuals acting like atomistic agents in the market.  The interesting this is that Pete could have also been in the US music industry in the 1990s, seeing a way to market the unmarketable, hard-edged rap and hip-hop by black artists to mainstream audiences.

So, Pete the weasel turns out to be both the hero of capitalism and racial “equity.”

Twitterversion::  newblogpost:: Clips of #MadMen showing #PeteCampbell’s #ethnicmarketing pitch for a TV brand in 1963. #ThickCulture  http://url.ie/2gwu  @Prof_K

Song:: Brown Sugar – The Rolling Stones

While I tend to agree with Paul Krugman that the Obama healthcare proposal is most akin to a Swiss-style healthcare programme {Hat Tip:: KM}, I think it’s useful to look at systems comparatively.  This clip is not from Sicko, but from CBS Sunday Morning::

While the French model is having its problems on the financing side and it is indeed embedded with French culture, I think it provides insights into thinking about healthcare as an institution.  I’m interested in how policy can shape innovation and if the federal government has monopsony power, it can create incentives for improvements in delivery.  The diagnostic approach and the housecalls are interesting approaches, but this would necessitate change.  Sociology predicts that there will be institutional resistance to change, but health care reform has the unique opportunity to shape new institutional logics.  I saw a presentation at ASA on compliance with a law limiting the hours of medical residents.  You would think it was a no-brainer.  It’s the law, hence there would be compliance.  Wrong.  The social construction of the medical establishment overrode this, shaping actual praxis.

Twitterversion:: Clip from #CBS Sunday Morn. on French healthcare. While not directly applicable, food 4 thought re: innov. & improvements.http://url.ie/28qf @Prof_K

Song:: La Mer

La Mer – Francoise Hardy

Anyone curious on how how pro-single payer physicians think about the issues, I encourage you to check out the Physicians for a National Healthcare Program {PNHP} FAQ.  Here’s a list of PNHP single-payer resources, as well.  As stated in an earlier post, I view health care as infrastructure that can spur innovation, creativity, and entrepreneurship and like many in the biotech. industry, I see a single-payer model {public finance of healthcare, as opposed to provision} as important for implementation of genomic medicine.

I won’t go into the healthcare debate and media circus, but will link to an article on a recent NBC poll.  Interestingly, 36% believe that Obama’s reform efforts are a good idea, but 53% support a paragraph describing his plans.  It’s a communication problem.  If you think all of the cacophony at the town halls is helping the GOP, you’re wrong.  The NBC poll reports 62% disapprove of their handling of health care.

The PNHP is highly critical of the administrative costs of healthcare and are no fans of the insurance industry.  Insurance also affects how healthcare providers do their jobs.  I have access to hospital data that’s used to “manage care” to maximize insurance reimbursement.  Moreover, there are powerful incentives in the insurance industry to maximize profits by denying claims.  The PNHP recognizes that a single-payer system will adversely affect insurance::

“The new system will still need some people to administer claims. Administration will shrink, however, eliminating the need for many insurance workers, as well as administrative staff in hospitals, clinics and nursing homes. More health care providers, especially in the fields of long-term care, home health care, and public health, will be needed, and many insurance clerks can be retrained to enter these fields. Many people now working in the insurance industry are, in fact, already health professionals (e.g. nurses) who will be able to find work in the health care field again. But many insurance and health administrative workers will need a job retraining and placement program. We anticipate that such a program would cost about $20 billion, a small fraction of the administrative savings from the transition to national health insurance.”

So, shouldn’t we be concerned about insurance ?  Are they getting a bad rap?  Are they really evil?  Isn’t it a part of financial intermediation, providing the critical function of polling resources and spreading risk?

Malcolm Gladwell in a 2005 New Yorker article did a good job of explaining two forms of insurance:: social and actuarial.  Social insurance pools money from many for a public good, regardless of usage, in order to sustain an infrastructure.  Actuarial insurance is quite different and has been the pathway that US healthcare has been going::

“How much you pay is in large part a function of your individual situation and history: someone who drives a sports car and has received twenty speeding tickets in the past two years pays a much higher annual premium than a soccer mom with a minivan.”

Think pre-existing conditions.  The actuarial model is why biotech. wants a single-payer system.  Genomics identify risks and will eventually match individuals, diseases, and therapies on the basis of genetic information.  Doctors see this on the horizon and Robin Cook, MD offered this NY Times op. ed. on how he had revised his views on universal health care.

But, if you were to craft a business model, which would you choose to invest in, if you wanted to make the most profit?::  {1} social insurance that pools equal premiums from all and allocates care to all or {2} actuarial insurance that charges more for people who have a higher likelihood of becoming ill and can deny care for pre-existing conditions or treatment deemed unwarranted.  The actuarial model can easily align with a set of values of individualism, as well as moral judgments about treating certain diseases {e.g., a smoker with lung cancer}.  I’ve seen people on discussion boards claim that “I can take care of my own” and perplexed why everyone else cannot.  How I see it, the current debates are really about using individualism to protect corporate interests.  I see plenty of incentives for the actuarial insurance industry and politicians to fan the argumentative flames about wild-eyed hypotheticals, as opposed to substantive debates about implementation. The devil is in the details.

Gladwell concluded his article with the following::

“In the rest of the industrialized world, it is assumed that the more equally and widely the burdens of illness are shared, the better off the population as a whole is likely to be. The reason the United States has forty-five million people without coverage is that its health-care policy is in the hands of people who disagree, and who regard health insurance not as the solution but as the problem.”

Twitterversion:: Who will weep 4 actuarial US health insur. indstry? Are they/backers obfuscating real debates on implmntatn w/histrionics?http://url.ie/28qa @Prof_K

Song:: Pay For It – Lloyd Cole