I recently read Gregg Easterbrook's It's Better Than It Looks: Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear. This fit in quite nicely with my overall cultural transition from Chile (yeah I guess it's been four months already): the most striking aspect of American society that I noticed upon my return was the large gap between Americans' perceived wellbeing and the incredible wealth (public and private) that has accumulated in this nation. Despite the fact that life is pretty good for most folks, we have a tendency to descend into 'declinist' ideas about the end of America's golden age (myself generally more than others).
Easterbrook made a mostly honest attempt at acknowledging some of the challenging systemic problems that skew our economy, including:
- the Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction that heavily subsidizes homeowners at the expense of renters (and no, there is no moral high ground associated with homeownership; renting is a necessary part of life and actually improves economic efficiency by allowing folks to move to where the work is)
- skyrocketing health care costs due to an inefficient health care bureaucracy and perverse incentives within the industry (he notes, as many others do, that the U.S. ranks extremely low in 'bang for your buck' when it comes to healthcare)
That said, Easterbrook frequently employed the hand-waving Malcolm Gladwellian arguments based on the claim that (paraphrasing), "correlation does not imply causation, but the relationship between these two variables is just too interesting and exciting to be a coincidence" (which is exactly the situation in which caution should be exercised). As I spend more time reading, writing, and editing technical literature, it becomes increasingly obnoxious to read journalists (1) trampling all over statistical relationships that have been carefully verified by hardworking researchers, and (2) using imprecise language that muddles and oversimplifies ideas. A much more precise and accurate account of the same story is provided in Nobel Prize-winning economist Angus Deaton's The Great Escape: Health, Wealth, and the Origins of Inequality.
Easterbrook also falls into the agriculture trap that has gripped public policy for nearly a century: we must cheapen food to the extent that there is enough for everyone. No one will argue that the Norman Borlaugian increases in agricultural yield have not helped lift millions out of poverty. However, Easterbrook and other proponents of this philosophy tend to ignore the fact that this mass-produced food which has done so much for the developing world is not healthy for human consumption! He goes even further to suggest that proponents of climate change mitigation should support industrialized agriculture because it produces more food with less land, allowing more land to remain forested (and store carbon). Again, this quantity over quality of life argument will need to be confronted in the coming century, as the millions who have been lifted out of poverty start to realize that long-term consumption of mass-produced wheat, rice, corn, and soy causes inflammation and its associated diseases: Alzheimers, cancer, heart disease etc.
Easterbrook notes correctly that the programs proposed by folks like AOC and Bernie Sanders simply cannot be financed by making the rich "pay their fair share." The 1% is very obnoxious, but even they don't have enough money to fund everything we want! This tired liberal talking point that has been recycled on talk radio since the 1970's needs to die. Easterbrook suggests that Universal Basic Income (Milton Friedman's 'negative income tax') could replace all forms of social assistance, which currently require massive bureaucracies to manage. Angus Deaton cautions that UBI has not worked in the past, but as far as I can tell, most of the problems identified with UBI relate to the 'universality' component (i.e. why give money to billionaires?). Of course, Friedman's negative income tax kicks in at a certain wealth or income threshold.
What does this mean for me personally? I've been going out of my way to appreciate the wonders of our modern economy: the other day, I purchased discounted Pacific scallops at 8000 feet in a land-locked state! I can order bulk tea, spices, seeds, nuts, and just about whatever else I need on the internet and have it within a week! Nuts! I think this book was a very constructive platform on which to determine which things I really like about America (stability, things generally work, traffic flows, air quality, peanut butter etc.), and those things that I appreciate but that I could get for much cheaper in other countries (housing and healthcare). Fun fact: Costa Rica has similar health outcomes, life expectancies etc. as the United States at a fraction of the cost! This, along with Costa Rica's commitment to renewable energy and endless growing season may provide fertile soil on which to base the rest of my existence!
