Engineers lacking in US decision-making? Show civic responsibility 20

[kenvlach]

IMHO: too many engineers don't bother with their responsibility to be good citizens. Instead of making an effort to be informed and participating in guiding the course of the nation, they are blasé and allow politicians (mostly lawyers, some corrupt) and special interest groups to shape our future.

Example: The ASCE calculated that $1.6 trillion is needed over a five-year period to bring the nation's infrastructure to a good condition. This would boost the economy, productivity and quality of life throughout the US. See

http://www.asce.org/reportcard/2005/index.cfm

But instead, a huge, non-productive spending is going into a black hole outside the US (Iraq), increasing the national debt and incurring long-term costs which will bring the total spent to possibly $2 Trillion including long-term health care to disabled vets. Perhaps even worse, the US is furnishing men & women, vehicles and buildings for terrorist live-fire targets. The righteous rage of Americans over 9/11 got conned into supporting "the worst foreign policy mistake" in the 200+ history of the US [conservative columnist Pat Buchanan].
For a total Iraq war cost estimate from Harvard & Columbia professors (including the 2001 Nobel laureate in economics), see
'Iraq Black Hole
The $2-Trillion War'

http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/050682.html

BYW, when allocating resources to a given project, the consequences of not funding alternatives must be considered. Indirect costs of the Iraq fiasco in my opinion will be even greater than referenced above.

Consider the consequences of having redeployed men, materiel and intelligence assets from Afghanistan: A resurgent Taliban, no justice for 9/11, record opium poppy crop, an expensive eradication program rather than a logical solution, a weakened government in (nuclear-capable) Pakistan...

Also, the US Navy has reduced surveillance and interdiction of cocaine traffickers in the Eastern Pacific off Latin America by 50% and by more than two-thirds in the Caribbean (and all but 5 of the DEA's Black Hawk helicopters assigned to the Caribbean have been taken away, with those 5 due to go by Oct). Consequences are a doubling of the cocaine supply to the US (Pentagon estimate) and drug/civil wars in Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico.
The impact is enormous.

The recent Minneapolis bridge collapse illustrates that politicians have been setting the wrong priorities for the US, while making us all pay. Remember the $231M 'bridge to nowhere' in Alaska? The $500M added to the Katrina & War funding bill in May 2006 to move a railroad ( rebuilt within 10 days of Katrina) & highway inland in order to build resorts & casinos along Mississippi's Gulf coast?

How has all this happened? In part, we as citizens haven't held politicians accountable. Being informed is the first step. Be skeptical about what they say – follow the money trails. I hope that in the future, engineers help steer the nation's course of action, rather than passively waiting for possible job assignments to trickle down.

P.S. If hesitant about getting involved or voicing an opinion, remember that w/o funding, engineering wouldn't be a profession, merely an academic exercise – and homework gets red-flagged!

 

[csd72]

HgTx,

I came to the same conclusion of GWBs speach, sounded impressive but where is it coming from?

The tax rate needs to increase, just plain and simple. In the US you are paying some of the lowest taxes in the western world, and then spending a large chunk of that on the military, and then expecting the government to have the money to sort anything out.

That said, there are a number of areas where less should be spent including industry subsidies for low emplyment industries such as timber.

csd

 

[gearguru]

csd72,
do not forget, that the other "western" countries use the taxes for health insurance, pensions and subsidized education (and making planes like Airbus, too...); in the USA we pay much more for those services from our own pockets. That's why the taxes are (perhaps, I did not check the statistics) lower.
There definitely is money for fixing/maintaining the infrastructure; it is about how the senat uses the money, this time I have to agree with GWB. If I were sure, that the extra tax will be really used just for that purpose, I'd support the idea. Where all the money collected on the toll roads go? As I can see, not to maintain those highways. The same would happen with the "fix-the-bridges" tax.

 

[csd72]

I see your point gearguru,

The US has three departments involved in immigration whereas most countries have just one. For a theoretically minimalist federal government they sure have the red tape down to an art.

You are right about the health and pensions, these are a huge drain on most other economies.

csd

 

[KENAT]

Is healthcare really a drain?

If your populace are better cared for medically will they be more productive? Less days lost to illness, work more efficiently when they are there because they are well, or even less deaths of productive people?

State pensions, due to the way they were set up & introduced could more obviously be seen as a drain. You could always budget for say 5 years of retirement, you get to pick when you actually retire. Then if you hit 5 years you lose your state pension. If you aren't independently wealthy you either get a job or head to the knackers yard.

Sound reasonable?

You know what, everyone told me when I moved to the states that I'd be a lot better off but looking at my paycheck, by the time you include what I pay for medical about as much % ends up vanishing before I see it as it did in the UK. Also being in California the supposed lower cost of living seems a bit of an a exaggeration. And before you say it, at least with my local facilities the level of health care isn't massively better.


KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[RDK]

If you want to compare tax rates you have to take a look at what you get in return for those taxes.

The US is alone in the western world as a major economy without a government health care system. For countries with a government sponsored health care system this is the largest single government expense.

Other different levels of services provided are not that large as a % of overall GDP.

Overall US tax rates are about 30% of GDP and another 15% is spent on health care.

Canada spends about 34% of GDP in taxes and gets health care included.

Tax rates also have to be adjusted for deficit spending (or in Canada’s case a governmental surplus).

You then have a choice of comparing tax (adjusted for health care and government deficit/surplus) on a dollar basis or as a % of GDP basis.

The attached table is based on data from nationmaster.com
It is not 100% as there is a public private split in health care in government health care countries and does not take into account deficit/surplus spending but it puts the discussion in the ball bark.

as Percent of GDP Dollar amounts
taxes Health care Tax+- health GDP Tax Health tax +- health
Canada 35.8% 9.4% 26.4% 29,866 10,692 2,807 7,885
US 29.6% 13.9% 43.5% 39,452 11,678 5,484 17,162
UK 37.4% 7.5% 29.9% 35,421 13,247 2,657 10,591
Japan 27.1% 7.8% 19.3% 36,285 9,833 2,830 7,003
Germany 37.9% 10.8% 27.1% 32,929 12,480 3,556 8,924


So much for the myth that the US is a low tax country.

We are engineers lets base our discussions on some data, especially when this data is easily available.



Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[RDK]

There is a logic error in the above table.

I subtracted health costs from all non US companies and added it to US numbers.

I should only have done one or the other.

Here is the revised numbers with health care costs added to US taxes and not considered in other countries numbers.

The US is still the most expensive both on a percentage basis and on a per capita basis.

Country % of GDP Per Capita
Taxes Health Care Tax plus Health GDP Taxes Health Care Tax plus Health
Canada 36% 9% 36% 29,866 10,692 2,807 10,692
US 30% 14% 44% 39,452 11,678 5,484 17,162
UK 37% 8% 37% 35,421 13,247 2,657 13,247
Japan 27% 8% 27% 36,285 9,833 2,830 9,833
Germany 38% 11% 38% 32,929 12,480 3,556 12,480



Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[SomptingGuy]

Interesting data. It tells me that the USA pays too much for its Health Care. maybe that's because it's all private?

 

[KENAT]

Yeah you have 2 systems.

Private healthcare, competition etc will force prices down, but, at the end of the day someone somewhere is making a profit from it so charge more than the bare minimum. Of course due to the fact that many hospitals are registered charities and that the widespread price setting of insurance companies limits the real competition this is a simplification.

Public healthcare, government bureaucracies are notoriously inefficient and for some reason no one expects any different, so some of the money will be wasted on paper pushing, however, they are ‘not for profit’ so in theory you aren’t just padding someone’s bank balance. The fact that many public healthcare systems outsource some services detracts from this and makes it again, a simplification.

Not sure either has a clear advantage but all in all, I think I was probably happier with the way it was in the UK but then again, I never had any major medical problems or got stuck on a waiting list for 18 months and lived in a part of the country with above average wealth and hence better health care, different circumstances may have changed my opinion.

But this is getting off topic, probably.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[csd72]

Somptinguy,

Healthcare is expensive in the US, some of my prescriptions cost three times as much as they do in Australia.

Add to that the large amount of people that are eating way too many hamburgers and it is not a surprise.

The japanese are too busy working to go to the doctor, so no surprise there.

I dont know how the US to UK comparison works as in the UK the Public Healthcare is free and therefore comes out of taxes.

csd

 

[SomptingGuy]

I dont know how the US to UK comparison works as in the UK the Public Healthcare is free and therefore comes out of taxes.

But the doctors, nurses and others still need to be paid. The buildings need to be built and paid for. The drugs cost the same. So why all this costs 14% of USA GDP and only 8% of UK GDP is interesting, regardless of whether it's paid directly (i.e. privately or via insurance) or indirectly (i.e. through tax). Unless of course USA doctors are all millionaires??

 

[csd72]

Somptingguy,

But the question is regarding the fact that they add this up with the tax at the end, if it comes out of tax, how is it added to the tax to get a comparison? Is the 8% only private/ optional treatment, or is the 8% a proportion of the tax that is used to support health (in which case the 37 should really .

Either way the comparison does not stack up.

As for the OP. By my calculation, the US has had as many Actors as president as it has had Engineers! Have we sunk so low?

csd

csd

 

[KENAT]

csd72 , from your last sentance you need to check out thread731-194341 ;-)

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[RDK]

US health care costs are higher for three reasons, IMHO

1) More health care available. More high tech equipment etc available for more elective procedures.
2) Due to the legal system in the US with large lawsuits always a possibility. This increases costs by two mechanisms, increased insurance premiums force up costs and defensive medicine.( tests ordered for CYA reasons not medical reasons)
3) Private for profit is more expensive than public not for profit. (Canada is always losing doctors, especially specialists to the US due to the much higher earnings for them there. Drugs are much cheaper in Canada than in the USA hence the many internet pharmacies delivering drugs mail order to US customers)

Did I mention that Canadians, Japanese, UK, and Germans all have a longer life expectancy than Americans, more expensive is not necessarily better.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[csd72]

Or perhaps both the cost and the life expectancy are a symptom of too many pizzas and burgers?

Just a thought.

csd

 

[civilperson]

If a majority of legislators can make pi equal to three, then engineers need to stay out of politics.

 

[patdaly]

Rick hit a major nail on the head, we in the US have access to health care in small towns that the rest of the world would love to have in large urban areas. Many times, this equipment is not utilized to its fullest, but it is there if and when needed.

There was just a case of quads being born to parents living in Alberta I believe and they had to be born in the states because that was the closest place with the facilities.

And no matter what the politicians say, people do not get turned away from our hospitals that have acute health care needs, even our tiny little hospital in a town of 12,000 is awash with people with no health care, of which they spread their costs to those of us with insurance.

 

[KENAT]

patdaly, I live in a fairly out of the way part of California in the middle of the desert. The local medical facilities do not have a particularly good reputation in most respects. The hospital especially. This is in a town of around 25000.

To get anywhere else with health care is a 1 hour 15 minute drive.

In the UK while I was further from the nearest hospital, 15mins maybe, I had at least 3 very good (at least one of them teaching) hospitals within about 30 -45 minutes.

Part of this is just the fact that the US is more spread out than most european countries however...

This is part of the reason why I actually rate the care I got in the UK slightly better than that I've got so far in the US. Not everyones experience is the same but from what I've seen I think a lot of US citizens over rate their health care. If you happen to have good healthcare from your employer and live somewhere with good facilities sure it's probably better. For the rest of the population, I think they may be better in one of the countries with state health care.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[patdaly]

Kenat, please make no mistake, I do not rate the quality of our health care that good, in fact, though we have a wonderful facility in this town of 12K ( we even have a 64 bit CT machine!), the doctors here have a difficult time reading a simple X-Ray. I have found that given a bit of time to research, I can usually diagnose myself with equal accuracy.

In terms of cost though, our "gotta have it right here, right now" mentality is adding huge costs to our system.

There has to be a better way, somewhere in between state run mediocrity and privately run excess.

 

[csd72]

The Australian system isnt too bad, it is about halfway in between the two (UK and US) we have government subsidised doctors and public hospitals.

In the US I find that I am referred to a specialist for things that my Australian GP would just treat, therefore making the cost of the treatment three times as much in the US on that basis alone.

csd

 

[KENAT]

Patdaly maybe I slightly misunderstood your point, sorry. In fact I think I agree. In the UK (sounds like similar to AUS) your GP acts almost like triage and will treat most simple things themself. In the US for anything remotely out of the ordinary you get sent to a specialist. I realize some HMO act a little like this.

I'm sure sometimes this pays off but a lot of the time I can't help thinking it costs a lot of money for little increase in quality.

How about a tax on non re-constructive plastic surgery with the money going into state healthcare (or equivalent).

Also in law suits for medical mal-practice. The compensatory damages go to the plaintiff, these should be off some kind of scale/formula. Any punitive damages go again to state healthcare (or equivalent).

I know some states do have certain limits on the damages awarded but in some cases they seen high, which leads to higher doctor liability insurance, higher costs...

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...