We are continuing the updates of economic impact of the issues. In each of these, you will see how the economy changes, who bears the heaviest burden, and how all the issues intersect to drive or inhibit economic growth and prosperity for all.
This post is about the environment in SWFL. It shows the impact of pollution, sea rise and climate change in our part of the world.
In this year, 2018, the hottest year on record for the last 10 years, the ten years before than, and the ten years before that, we have seen the enormous growth of red tide into a year-long display, a highly unusual growth and size of blue-green algae, and, currently, some new “colors” coming into view.
We know, after many long years of studying the blooms, that these are caused by warming waterways, unusual amounts of rain, longer hot seasons, runoff of fertilizers/pesticides/phosphates, and human and animal waste.
How does that support good education outcomes? It doesn’t. This is a real-life example of social insecurity/ housing insecurity that has real-life impact on the success of the student and her lifelong ability to earn a living.
It’s part of the total support system of improving health and lives. Called the Social Determinants of Health, #SDOH shows the impact of low level or missing determinants in health care. Some of the points are home security, mental health support, secure job and wages. We wrote about it here.
Children need the security of the education and a safe home in order to succeed. Switching domiciles, sleeping in shelters, or being removed from families are not moments of security. The stigma and interruptions that are inherent in homelessness– even something as not being able to join an after-school program or sport– become messages of unworthiness to a growing child.
Workers with Low Education Have Not Recovered from Recession
Excerpt from Brookings: The Great Recession inflicted economic pain on many American families, but its burden was not equally distributed. Ultimately, the brunt of the Great Recession was borne by those without the protection of postsecondary education. College raises average lifetime earnings, and it also helps insulate workers from economic downturns, providing economic security in the times they need it most. Finally, racial disparities have been less severe in recovery than in the worst years of the Great Recession, though differences in employment rates persist. For the American labor market to be truly healthy, it needs to work for all people—not just some.
When we consider school policies, educational requirements, and post high-school education, we must test our ideas across a continuum of barriers that can lead to poorer outcomes. Clearly, in the largest and most prosperous economy in the world, there is no place for homelessness, and even minus space for kids without home security.
You’ve probably heard the starfish story. There’s a boy on the beach who finds thousands of starfish washed ashore, dying. He picks one up and throws it back into the ocean. A passer-by asks him what’s the point of that. All these thousands of other starfish are still going to die. “Well,” the boy responds, “I saved that one.”
Many of our social programs are based on that theory of social change. We try to save people one at a time. We pick a promising kid in a neighborhood and give her a scholarship. Social programs and philanthropic efforts cream skim in a thousand ways. Or they mentor one at a time, assuming that the individual is the most important unit of social change.
Obviously it’s possible to do good that way. But you’re not really changing the structures and systems that shape lives.
Maybe the pool story is a better metaphor than the starfish story. As a friend of mine puts it, you can’t clean only the part of the pool you’re swimming in.
It could be that the neighborhood, not the individual, is the essential unit of social change. If you’re trying to improve lives, maybe you have to think about changing many elements of a single neighborhood, in a systematic way, at a steady pace.
One of the signature facts of the internet age is that distance is not dead. Place matters as much as ever, and much more than we ever knew.
Read More https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/18/opinion/neighborhood-social-infrastructure-community.html
Some research supporting the concept
Low-income children who moved at birth from the low upward-mobility area of Seattle’s Central District to the high upward-mobility area of Shoreline earned, at age 35, $9,000 a year more than those who had made this move in their 20s.
Shoreline is 10 miles from the Central District.
In a classic study, the sociologist Eric Klinenberg showed just how important neighborhood is in determining who survives in a crisis. Klinenberg compared deaths in two Chicago neighborhoods during a heat wave in 1995. More than six times as many people died in North Lawndale as in South Lawndale, even though the two places are demographically comparable.
The fact is that human behavior happens in contagious, networked ways. Suicide, obesity and decreasing social mobility spread as contagions…
David Brooks, NYT 10.19.18
Thinking in neighborhood terms requires a radical realignment in how you see power structures. Does the neighborhood control its own networks of care, or are there service providers coming down from above? Do the local norms of interaction need to be changed? For example, do people feel it’s normal to knock on a neighbor’s door and visit, or would that be considered a dangerous invasion of privacy? Are there forums where the neighborhood can tell its collective story?
Florida officials have made yet another attempt to win approval for their federal education accountability plan, submitting revisions on both June 6 — a day after receiving a negative status update — and again Aug. 24 after the June proposal was not approved.
The key point of contention, according to a cover letter from Gov. Rick Scott, has not been the concerns over learning requirements for English language learners, as some civil rights advocates repeatedly have hammered to improve.
We often speak only about the direct costs of care: health visits, cost of drugs, hospital stays.
But it’s important to remember that the consequences are far more expansive than immediate costs. The total costs stretch to all sectors of the economy.
Economics affect all parts of our lives
Whether we are discussing clean water and climate change or education, immigration, and so many more issues, there is a cost to most of not all sectors our communities. Often, there is a national cost that can be measured, too.
It’s for this reason that we present our first chart for you:
Climate change is happening, but it’s not man-made.
Climate change is man-made, but doing anything about it would destroy jobs and kill economic growth.
These are the stages of climate denial. Or maybe it’s wrong to call them stages, since the deniers never really give up an argument, no matter how thoroughly it has been refuted by evidence. They’re better described as cockroach ideas — false claims you may think you’ve gotten rid of, but keep coming back.
About those cockroaches: Details aside, the very multiplicity of climate-denial arguments — the deniers’ story keeps changing, but the bottom line that we should do nothing remains the same — is a sign that the opponents of climate action are arguing in bad faith. They aren’t seriously trying to engage with the reality of climate change or the economics of reduced emissions; their goal is to keep polluters free to pollute as long as possible, and they’ll grab onto anything serving that goal.
Paul Krugman has been an Opinion columnist since 2000 and is also a Distinguished Professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He won the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade and economic geography. @PaulKrugman
Paul Krugman Macroeconomics, trade, health care, social policy and politics.
Many of us in the health care and economic fields have known for decades that even the best health care, by itself, does not deliver the best outcomes. About a decade ago, the University of Wisconsin in partnership with JAMA and the Kaiser Family Foundation published the earliest charts of what social factors influence health outcomes. You may be familiar with smoking and poor diets. But the Social Determinants of Health #SDOH encompass much more.
Social determinants very often are predictors of better (or worse) health outcomes. Some of these include exercise, support community, neighborhood, clean food, clean water… and still more. You can see the list in the chart below.
You can see that these assets (or, risk factors, if they don’t exist) can disable a great diagnosis and treatment plan. Many of the great success stories in cancer, diabetes, depression and most assuredly, addiction, are successes because they included so many of these factors in order to achieve the success.
When we withhold funding, put barriers to affordability or access, or deny people the basic education, food, or clean water in our great economy, we are hindering their life expectancy and social mobility as well.
Martin Luther King said it best:
Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health careis the most shocking and inhumane.
Kaiser Family Foundation is a trusted source for health care data, surveys and year over year monitoring. Just as Pew Organization surveys culture impact, KFF monitors many dimensions of health care impact. In this survey, it is painfully obvious that voters are worried about health care costs and affordability. Sixty-seven percent (67%) are concerned.
Drew Altman, of KFF, explains more about this problem in a post for Axios:
It helps explain why so many people name health their top issue, despite the progress that has been made in covering the uninsured. And everyone who’s sick and can’t afford medical care has family members and friends who see what they are going through, creating a political multiplier effect.
It is also why health care is substantially an economic issue as well as an issue of access to care. When people have trouble paying medical bills, it’s a hard hit to their family budgets — causing many people to take a second job, roll up more debt, borrow money, and forego other important family needs.
The GOP keeps hammering at health care and specifically at the Affordable Care Act (ACA). In many ways, these efforts look like moments for election ads. Except, of course, that there are real people who are going to get hurt.
Removing essential benefits, one of which is coverage for pre-existing conditions, is a key portion of the ACA (otherwise known as Obamacare). The democrats in the Senate proposed a measure to keep the coverage of pre-existing conditions, but, NOPE, the GOP didn’t buy in.
We all know that people without health insurance cost more money than those who are able to get the care they need. My work in this field has shown 10-50% higher costs for patients with pre-existing conditions who are not compliant with their treatments (medicine, physical therapy, tests, etc). The average cost of the patient who is not compliant is 30% higher than a compliant patient. And when folks can’t afford to use the insurance because the deductible or copay is too high, the uncovered treatment becomes the tax payers’ problem, as hospitals and clinicians demand payment.
GOP Votes No to Pre-Existing Conditions Just Before Midterms
In a 50-50 vote, Republicans defeated a Democratic measure to stop the return of denying health coverage for pre-existing conditions. The measure was part of a Democratic attempt to bring healthcare to the forefront of the campaign for control of Congress in November.
This was possible because the short-term health plans Trump has been pushing don’t need to adhere to the standards of normal plans governed by the Affordable Care Act.
“The Trump administration is rewriting the rules on guaranteed health care protections that millions of Americans depend on,” stated Senator Tammy Baldwin(D-Wisconsin), who is up for reelection in November. “These junk insurance plans can deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions and don’t have to provide essential health services like prescription drugs, emergency room visits and maternity care.”
It was Baldwin who filed the petition to reconsider Trump’s weakening of pre-existing condition protections.
After a year of failed attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Republicans began employing a new strategy — corrode it until it no longer had any meaning. This “collapse and replace” strategy has been working fairly well for opponents of Obamacare.