Clear77° WeatherClear77° Weather
Edward Renner

For quality of life, U.S. often dead last

If we compare the United States with the other rich, developed, market democracies of the world — such as France, Germany, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Denmark, etc. — where do we stand? Is the United States in the upper or lower half of these nations on indexes that measure quality of life for their citizens? Mark each statement true or false.

The United States is among the top half of these developed nations:

1. With the lowest incidence of mental illness.

2. With the lowest incidence of drug use.

3. With the lowest infant mortality rate.

4. With the lowest rates of obesity.

5. With the lowest rates of teenage pregnancies.

6. With the lowest rates of homicide.

7. With the lowest rates of people in prison.

8. With the highest level of social mobility (the opportunity for children to do better economically than their parents).

9. With the highest rate of national income spent on foreign aid.

10. With the highest UNICEF Index on the well-being of children.

11. With the highest level of life expectancy.

12. With the highest levels of math and literacy scores of 15-year-olds.

Not only is the correct answer to each of the questions "false," but on the first eight questions the United States is dead last. On the combined index of the number of social and health problems, the United States is last. The common factor accounting for the quality of life in these countries is the disparity of wealth and income within the nation.

Of all the nations, the United States has by far the largest degree of income inequality between the rich and the poor. The Gini coefficient is recognized worldwide as the standard measure of income of inequality. In the United States, the coefficient is reported annually by the Census Bureau and is published in the Statistical Abstract of the United States.

These are the facts that describe our current reality. This is the information, not ideological beliefs, on which we must base our conclusions.

When the Gini coefficient becomes too large, a nation becomes less efficient. The very rich use their wealth to corrupt the political process by gaining undue advantage, in the United States through lobbying and campaign contributions. The number of people living in poverty increases and government support for social programs is reduced. The result is a breakdown in the social structure. As the quality of schools, roads and services declines, people become less satisfied, less healthy, less cooperative and less peaceful.

It has not always been this way. We have become the exception to our own ideals. This is in direct contrast to how we see ourselves. We have lost our perspective on the quality of life in our own country.

We can recover the historical standing we have had as the American ideal. The mechanisms responsible for smaller disparities of national income and wealth are well known.

Countries with higher levels of health and happiness, and fewer social problems, have:

1. A steeper progressive tax system.

2. A higher maximum marginal tax rate.

3. Government-sponsored universal health care.

4. A government-sponsored social safety net.

5. Government regulation that balances the competing forces of corporate power with the general welfare.

6. A willingness to limit standing military capacity, and the use of armed force only as an intervention of last, rather than first, resort.

All six have been part of our own history. And yet the Gini coefficient for the United States has been steadily increasing above the upper limit for efficiency since 1980. This is when tax cuts for the wealthy, and corporate and financial deregulation, became fashionable as our political philosophy. In a market economy, the lower limit for efficiency is a coefficient around 26. At this ideal level, inequality is minimized, without yet triggering the disincentive loss of creativity and productivity associated with socialism.

We have become an exception to what we have always believed ourselves to be. Will we will hear the wakeup call to our civic consciousness and take America back?

Professor Edward Renner teaches in the honors college at the University of South Florida. He blogs at forumsforafuture.blogspot.com.

For quality of life, U.S. often dead last 11/29/11 For quality of life, U.S. often dead last 11/29/11 [Last modified: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 5:58pm]

© 2014 Tampa Bay Times

    

Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours

Loading...
Edward Renner

For quality of life, U.S. often dead last

If we compare the United States with the other rich, developed, market democracies of the world — such as France, Germany, Britain, Australia, New Zealand, Norway, Denmark, etc. — where do we stand? Is the United States in the upper or lower half of these nations on indexes that measure quality of life for their citizens? Mark each statement true or false.

The United States is among the top half of these developed nations:

1. With the lowest incidence of mental illness.

2. With the lowest incidence of drug use.

3. With the lowest infant mortality rate.

4. With the lowest rates of obesity.

5. With the lowest rates of teenage pregnancies.

6. With the lowest rates of homicide.

7. With the lowest rates of people in prison.

8. With the highest level of social mobility (the opportunity for children to do better economically than their parents).

9. With the highest rate of national income spent on foreign aid.

10. With the highest UNICEF Index on the well-being of children.

11. With the highest level of life expectancy.

12. With the highest levels of math and literacy scores of 15-year-olds.

Not only is the correct answer to each of the questions "false," but on the first eight questions the United States is dead last. On the combined index of the number of social and health problems, the United States is last. The common factor accounting for the quality of life in these countries is the disparity of wealth and income within the nation.

Of all the nations, the United States has by far the largest degree of income inequality between the rich and the poor. The Gini coefficient is recognized worldwide as the standard measure of income of inequality. In the United States, the coefficient is reported annually by the Census Bureau and is published in the Statistical Abstract of the United States.

These are the facts that describe our current reality. This is the information, not ideological beliefs, on which we must base our conclusions.

When the Gini coefficient becomes too large, a nation becomes less efficient. The very rich use their wealth to corrupt the political process by gaining undue advantage, in the United States through lobbying and campaign contributions. The number of people living in poverty increases and government support for social programs is reduced. The result is a breakdown in the social structure. As the quality of schools, roads and services declines, people become less satisfied, less healthy, less cooperative and less peaceful.

It has not always been this way. We have become the exception to our own ideals. This is in direct contrast to how we see ourselves. We have lost our perspective on the quality of life in our own country.

We can recover the historical standing we have had as the American ideal. The mechanisms responsible for smaller disparities of national income and wealth are well known.

Countries with higher levels of health and happiness, and fewer social problems, have:

1. A steeper progressive tax system.

2. A higher maximum marginal tax rate.

3. Government-sponsored universal health care.

4. A government-sponsored social safety net.

5. Government regulation that balances the competing forces of corporate power with the general welfare.

6. A willingness to limit standing military capacity, and the use of armed force only as an intervention of last, rather than first, resort.

All six have been part of our own history. And yet the Gini coefficient for the United States has been steadily increasing above the upper limit for efficiency since 1980. This is when tax cuts for the wealthy, and corporate and financial deregulation, became fashionable as our political philosophy. In a market economy, the lower limit for efficiency is a coefficient around 26. At this ideal level, inequality is minimized, without yet triggering the disincentive loss of creativity and productivity associated with socialism.

We have become an exception to what we have always believed ourselves to be. Will we will hear the wakeup call to our civic consciousness and take America back?

Professor Edward Renner teaches in the honors college at the University of South Florida. He blogs at forumsforafuture.blogspot.com.

For quality of life, U.S. often dead last 11/29/11 For quality of life, U.S. often dead last 11/29/11 [Last modified: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 5:58pm]

© 2014 Tampa Bay Times

    

Join the discussion: Click to view comments, add yours

Loading...