- By what mechanism does Carson envision the present political order collapsing? Do you believe his projections are realistic?
- How does Carson believe social services could and would be provided in the absence of the state? What are the advantages and disadvantages of what he proposes?
- What evidence does Carson provide for the view that social services were delivered effectively absent the state in the past?
You should also feel free to post any question you might have for Carson.
Darla Tucker wrote...
ReplyDelete1. Carson envisions a sort of ever increasing parallel universe in which state subsidies to corporations are gradually eliminated and state subsidies to the poor are eliminated last. The state and its state-subsidized corporations would gradually be replaced with health care cooperatives, education cooperatives, worker cooperatives, credit unions, small,local farms, etc. However the government at the federal and state level is in hyper expansion mode through health care reform, FinReg and other laws, strengthening corporate-government collusion. So no, I don't believe this scenario is at all realistic. And despite a few layoffs here and there, the government seems to be the only entity hiring people in droves. Furthermore, I'm quite certain U.S.citizens would never support the dismantling of the military and Department of Defense given the economic, miltary and nuclear power plays taking place on the global stage.
Darla Tucker wrote ...
ReplyDelete2. Carson envisions public education and the health care system transformed into local cooperatives with public safety provided through contingents of volunteers or perhaps privately funded security forces. As a replacement to government-funded and operated education, he suggest parents pool their money and hire teachers in neighborhood collectives, teaching out of homes or small facilities and sports offered through community leagues (like the Azure Hills Basketball League?:) rather than costly state enterprises. He evisions health care provided locally through neighborhood clinic co-ops by minimally trained "barefoot doctors" and nurse practioners dispensing basic care and generic drugs; insurance coverage only for expensive tests which the consumer would choose based on cost; insurance coverage for catastropic illnes/injury. Public hospitals would be run by medical/technical reps, staff and "patient-members" - I'm not sure what is meant by a patient member.
The advantages of these alternative systems include much greater choice in education and health care and greatly lowered costs, particularly in health care with the elimination of third party management. The neighborhood health cooperatives would handle many of the uninsured and under-insured cases that are now crowding into aging emergency rooms that are often ill equipped to handle the increasing load.
On the whole, disadantages to these alternaive forms of education, public safety and health care would include a general lack of oversight - who is going to ensure general subjects are in fact being taught consistently by homeschoolers or small collectives so that the nation can consistently produce a well-educated workforce? Who is going to make sure neighborhood medical collectives are actually helping rather than causing harm though negligent, sloppy practice? And in the case of public safety, particularly with the police force, there is already a degree of corruption taking place(I have witnessed this in an up close and personal way a number of times!)- it seems that absent any sort of mechanism to hold gun-wielding security forces or even gun-wielding citizens accountable, the incidences of gang or mafia-style corruption would only increase, particularly with separate, private security forces the only means of enforcement operating in complete autonomy. I have very little faith in the ability of human beings, whether they are part of collectives or the government, to stop themselves from taking advantage of their positions of power and engage in corrupt acts. The disadvantages of privately-funded education cooperatives, beyond the oversight issues addressed above, involve many parents' inability to pay anything at all for education. And small is not always better. I attended one-room, rural parochial schools until fifth grade when I entered a much, much larger elementary in a suburb of Boston. While I had fun in the small, peaceful rural schools, I found out what it was like to work at academics at the larger school staffed by much more experienced and interested teachers, and where a higher level of bureaucracy and oversight existed.
Also, unfortunately, there is a segment of the population that seems to care little about involving themselves in their children's education and they simply wouldn't participate in a collective effort, increasing the potential for youth running the streets unsupervised and uneducated absent any laws keeping them in school.
Other disadvantages to the collective/cooperative model of health care include perhaps a lack of specialized medical care give the cold hard fact that high-tech drugs, medical devices like cardiac stents, and highly specialized fields of medicine involve massive wealth generation. Might not these developments and fields of practice simply fade away, taking many jobs and perhaps lives with them?
Darla Tucker wrote...
ReplyDelete3.Carson cites research that the working classes in Victorian England established schools in their neighborhoods that taught basic reading, writing and arithmatic. Also, during the late 1800s-early 1900s, millions of industrial workers in England were provided health insurance through registered friendly societies. Medical, dental and psychiatic care was provided through these societies. In the U.S. around this time, many working families received insurance through fratenal orders and some lodges provided doctor service for members for a subscription fee.
Q1. K. Carson sees the dissolution of subsidies, in any form as part of the plan. He proposes that things happen more at a local level, rather than trying to impose a system throughout and trying to manage it from afar. In this type of program, it would include education, health care, financial institutions,and the way that business should be modeled after. Focusing more on the local production. I find it highly doubtful though that Americans would allow the system that they have been fighting to keep propping up and they idealize to just gradually vanish. That idea that "everyone can achieve the American dream" and that said dream is to be one day be able to own everything slipping from their grasp will probably not be allowed.
ReplyDeleteQ2. I agree with what Darla is saying for this question. Social services are now shifted to a more community centered approach. While the benefits for this would definitely include that they are tailored to the actual needs of said community and that costs and bureaucratic nonsense are greatly reduced, how is one to expect that these entities that provide social services are measuring up to a certain standard of care? Perhaps it is my limitation that there needs to be someone supervising imposing a certain standard so that those who are interested in providing said service will be trying to meet or exceed that hypothetical line that denotes excellence in social services.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. Carson envisions that the larger focus of priority will be given to the poor while state subsidies to large corporations are eliminated. State subsidies will be replaced by cooperatives described in question 2. Although it seems as if we are a long way from this vision, I do believe it is possible. In such a large nation, there are always visionaries and, among those visionaries there is a couple that may be able to make the difference. It is possible that many Americans hold the same vision that Carson does especially due to the collapse of the economy. Americans are feeling less secure so there is a slow switch towards Carson's vision. A part of me does see how far we are from this however, another part of me also hopes that Americans will get sick of their current system because they have felt the back lash. Although I do not believe that every single one of these projections are realistic, I am hopeful.
ReplyDelete2. Carson believes that Social Services will be replaced by communities working together to provide them. Like Jose, I also agree with many of Darla's comments however, there are a few that I would like to add: Community based services allow the majority of the population to have more choices however, for the small percentage of those above average income, I think that it can be limiting. School would need to be compared to eachother therefore there must be some type of national system to rate them. Furthermore, how is it decided what the guidelines are to move your child to a more highly rated school? If it is by location than I believe that everyone will want to move there. Certain communities have larger pooled capital than others so, I am affraid that good education will only be taught where there is a larger amount of pooled money. It is possible for low income communities to have good education programs however, I believe money can only be replaced with time. It is ideal that all parents take and interest in their child's education however, this seems to be quite difficult in rural communities because their jobs do not allow them to. Without resource or time, it would be difficult to make sure community education is at the level that it should be. I also agree with Darla on the point that there may be more corruption in public safety. It is sad to say however, there are a large amount of people who look for things on behalf of their own benefit. In this case, I feel as if the village chief would get rich. With all of the current regulation, the elites are still finding ways to be corrupt, the average person does not do this because they can not afford it. If there was public safety on a smaller level, I believe more corruption would happen on a smaller scale.
3.Carson gives many examples of social services being delivered in the past, rather than listing every single one, I would rather give my insight on this. I believe that social services were effective in the past not only because of the eveidence stated by Carson but also because, I believe that at the time it was the only way. There are many countries who still practice this method however for the most part, these countries are not first world. I believe it is the cycle of an economy that prevents it from maintaining social services. Socialism seems to work for Canada but I believe that it is because they chose to stay there. When a nation begins to grow, wherever they stabilize at will most likely be what everything else is based on. For the United States, I do not think it is impossible to come back to Social Services absent the state however, I believe it will be difficult to move backwards even though sometimes backwards may be better.