tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post8634191032391729719..comments2024-01-11T07:40:01.736-05:00Comments on The Stopped Clock: The Absurdly High Cost of CrimeAaronhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16523334580402022332noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post-21804833871331084732010-10-19T06:35:57.198-04:002010-10-19T06:35:57.198-04:00Sure, now that we've already adopted Mythago i...Sure, now that we've already adopted Mythago is willing to support changing the laws in our favor. : )<br /><br />. . . and Aaron, I like the concept but #1, the whole Sparta thing (with exposing sickly babies and forcing children to steal to get enough to eat) is a little to creepy even for me and #2 we don't need to steal babies for the army, we have the recession to help recruiting.<br /><br />CWDAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post-77595226418537661282010-10-18T23:27:05.177-04:002010-10-18T23:27:05.177-04:00Maybe we could raise the kids in state-run facilit...Maybe we could raise the kids in state-run facilities to become super-soldiers, in the manner of Sparta?Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16523334580402022332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post-36125775883076171422010-10-18T22:31:43.307-04:002010-10-18T22:31:43.307-04:00C'mon, Anonymous, don't pussyfoot around. ...C'mon, Anonymous, don't pussyfoot around. What 'guidelines' for childbearing do you think 'society' should establish? Forced abortions? Taking babies away at birth and giving them to nice, middle-class couples? Cutting off benefits past a certain number of children so we can punish the kids for being born? Involuntary sterilization?<br /><br />Surely you have something more than a timid suggestion that, perhaps, 'some guidelines' of an unspecified nature should exist.mythagohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07138471078836187498noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post-1035446065161514412010-10-18T19:54:05.693-04:002010-10-18T19:54:05.693-04:00"Citizens that pay for their children themsel...<em>"Citizens that pay for their children themselves think twice before having children and often limit themselves because they understand their limitations."</em><br /><br />True to a degree, but given that about 20% of children born <em>to married couples</em> are unplanned, it's far from a universal truth. And it's less true outside of marriage than within marriage. We use the terms "unwanted" and "unplanned" for a lot of pregnancies not because the parents chose to start a family - quite the opposite. Making babies is <em>easy</em> (and fun).<br /><br /><em>"This often is not the case with people that are entitled to Medicaid insurance."</em><br /><br />Do you have anything but a hunch to suggest that Medicaid eligibility makes people more likely to have children outside of marriage? It's my impression that hospitals often scramble to get Medicaid-eligible mothers, and those eligible for subsidized maternity insurance, onto a program such that they can receive adequate prenatal care.<br /><br /><em>"We have to change the Medicaid system or there will come a time where more people in the United States are receiving entitlements then are paying for them."</em><br /><br />Or we could change our conception of the provision of health insurance. There's nothing wrong, for example, with 100% of the population being on a national health insurance plan - and the world's experience with that is that on the whole you get better results for less money than you do with the U.S. "market-based" approach. No state has a perfect set of answers, and there are some very good elements to the U.S. system if you can afford to access them, but we could save a lot of money in a hurry by shifting to single-payer or one of the other models followed in nations like Germany, France or Japan.<br /><br /><em>"P.S. I understand that not all people that receive Medicaid fall into this category, but many do. As part of my job I examine Medicaid hospital bills. If more Americans could see what I see on a daily basis, they would be outraged."</em><br /><br />Of course, every system is subject to abuse. Even in the realm of private insurance there are abuses by patients, doctors, and insurance companies.<br /><br />As I see it, the issue is more "what type of society do we want to be"? I've been to nations that offer little to no health support for the poor, and there's not a one of them where I would actually want to live. I also don't relish the thought of living in a middle class enclave adjacent to a slum in which diseases like pertussis and cholera are rampant.Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16523334580402022332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post-79180233178456029832010-10-18T19:53:32.586-04:002010-10-18T19:53:32.586-04:00"People on Medicaid obviously cannot support ...<em>"People on Medicaid obviously cannot support themselves or they wouldn’t be on Medicaid in the first place. And the system allows them to have child after child without any repressions, but with added benefits . . . more monthly income."</em><br /><br />You appear to be describing two separate programs, Medicaid and ADC, as if they are the same. There are people who earn modest livings, and even children whose parents earn decent livings and qualify through SCHIP, who simply cannot afford health insurance and don't have it available as a job-related benefit. In fact, most people who receive health insurance as a job-related benefit would balk at paying the full cost out-of-pocket. That said, yes, by design, most Medicare recipients are poor.<br /><br /><em>"In addition to the financial cost to society for supporting these children, society also pays for it in increased education costs and crime costs."</em><br /><br />In terms of public education, obviously if you choose not to provide public education for people who cannot afford private schools, you're going to leave a huge percentage of the population either uneducated or receiving substandard but cheap 'private' education. From the standpoint of a modern society, that's not an acceptable 'solution' to poverty - in fact, it is pretty much a guaranteed path to making the problem worse.<br /><br />Most poor people manage to live law-abiding lives; not all wealthy people can say the same. Yes, street crime tends to be positively associated with poverty. But it's complicated - the inner city street dealer sells drugs to a lot of middle class people who are much less likely to be caught and prosecuted. Police often seem content to contain drug sales to an unfortunate part of the city, as opposed to trying to stamp it out - something that seems to merely shift it to another area (or areas).<br /><br /><em>"I know this is not a popular point of view, but I believe that if you are accepting entitlements from society because you cannot support yourself – then society should be able to establish some guidelines regarding child bearing."</em><br /><br />Saying stuff like that is the easy part. If you're willing to take the approach of China, and force women to have abortions pretty much up to the time of delivery, or the approaches taken by other totalitarian states... I guess it's possible. But leaving aside the legal and constitutional impediments to a state controlling or licensing procreation, it's difficult to imagine how you could implement restrictions in this country without seriously disrupting our nation's conception of individual rights and freedoms.<br /><br />Yes, if you become a teen parent or don't complete high school, or both, your chances of living an impoverished life go up significantly. Yes, people are better off deferring having children while they complete their educations. Yes, it can be incredibly frustrating that a significant population seems completely resistant to either message. But this is <em>not</em> an easy problem to fix. Even China has had incredible difficulties enforcing its "one child" rules, and it's a totalitarian state.Aaronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16523334580402022332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5973827.post-54134204057731803742010-10-17T09:41:36.029-04:002010-10-17T09:41:36.029-04:00I see the problem and solution so clearly. . . . M...I see the problem and solution so clearly. . . . Medicaid. People on Medicaid obviously cannot support themselves or they wouldn’t be on Medicaid in the first place. And the system allows them to have child after child without any repressions, but with added benefits . . . more monthly income. In addition to the financial cost to society for supporting these children, society also pays for it in increased education costs and crime costs. I know this is not a popular point of view, but I believe that if you are accepting entitlements from society because you cannot support yourself – then society should be able to establish some guidelines regarding child bearing. Citizens that pay for their children themselves think twice before having children and often limit themselves because they understand their limitations. This often is not the case with people that are entitled to Medicaid insurance. We have to change the Medicaid system or there will come a time where more people in the United States are receiving entitlements then are paying for them.<br />P.S. I understand that not all people that receive Medicaid fall into this category, but many do. As part of my job I examine Medicaid hospital bills. If more Americans could see what I see on a daily basis, they would be outraged.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com