© 1999 VNN
|
EDITORIAL January 10, 2000 VNN5247 Comment on this story Super-Mom - The Numbers BY RAGHUNATHA ANUDASA EDITORIAL, Jan 10 (VNN) — Replacing gov't on half the cost for twice the service. Super-Mom, The Numbers, is the 3rd installment. The first, The Economics of Love, was the letter of introduction to a new social, economics system founded upon the principles of love-varna-asrama dharma. In short, vice or bad activities have great economic cost, while virtue offers GREAT economic rewards. Today's system subsidizes vice and pillages the rewards of the virtuous. Reverse this system and we will have great prosperity. The first step would be to reward the virtuous. This starts with mom. We call it Mother*s Liberation. A mother's love embodies the best of virtue, love, and provides millions in economic rewards. The last chapter sent, The Mother*s Franchise, shows several ways to honor mother's work financially. Talent and sports agents receive a portion of their clients income. This common business practice provides a model for each family to use for their own children. The family serves the same function, but does lot more then most any agent. This was sent last month. The following reply to Christopher provides an over view of Mother*s Liberation as it answers each of her retorts to my first chapter called Super-Mom. Christopher said the "math" would bankrupt our government while only covering 10% of the people. The following shows the opposite to be true. Handing over just one third of our federal budget to mom would allow her to tend to two thirds of all American's including all the poor, seniors, children and moms. This chapter covers the "math" while the next chapter will cover the "issues." If you do not agree with any of these ideas, please let us know. The very purpose of this work is to stimulate greater discussion on these issues otherwise left out of our national political debates. We look forward to hearing from you. The following is only the summary and part 1 of this 4 part work. By Raghunatha Anudasa Chapter Summary: 1) The $236 billion Health and Human Services of your example is hardly 12% of the Federal gov't's $2 trillion budget. 70% of this budget is for family related "entitlements." Your "math" over looks this remaining TRILLION dollars along with all the other state, local, non-profit, commercial and personal money also spent on family related programs. Their combined cost represents the full price-tag of replacing the care provided by the family. 2) Much of the "financial needs" and tax-burdens of the modern-man are to compensate for the end of the families natural support system. Re-investing in our family may in fact reduce much of our financial demands otherwise taken by these corporate-state family programs. 3) The family is a far more competitive business structure for offering family care then government's commercial institutions. The family is not weighed down in the bloated BUREAUCRACY of these corporate-state programs. There's no unions to worry about and investor returns to satisfy; no advertising budgets to fill or management to pay. The family can, therefore, dedicate one full time nurse for each patient on half the budget of the commercial nursing homes $7,000 a month. The family's cost savings are realized by shedding the corporate bureaucracy. This is a far cry from the HMO "savings" approach of reduced patient care-- only one nurse for 15 to 60 patients. HMO nursing cost "efficiency" translates into investor profits only, not price-breaks for the tax-payer. Your example over looks this important difference. 4) The $20,000 per mom of your example would actually cover 35 million moms while only using $665 billion which is simply half the federal governments $1.3 trillion spent on family service "entitlements." All present government programs would continue on half the budget while already having covered the countries 91 million children and seniors of your example, plus the 35 million moms. Mom would be tending on just 2.5 people versus the 8 people of your example. Again, it matches our formula that mom is half the cost of gov't for twice the service. Dear Christopher, Bravo!! Bravo!!. I loved your "math." You've given an example that brilliantly demonstrates the heart of our discussion. 1) The $236 billion Health and Human Services of your example is hardly 12% of the Fed.s $2 trillion budget. 70% of this budget is for family related "entitlements." Your "math" over looks this remaining Trillion dollars along with all the other state, local, non-profit, commercial and personal money also spent on family related programs. Their combined cost represents the full price-tag of replacing the care provided by the family. The $236 billion Health and Human Services Dept. used in your example is hardly 12% of the federal governments $2 trillion annual budget - it's $1.9 trillion to be exact. Thirty percent of this is for military, foreign affairs and debt repayment. The remaining 70% of this budget or about $1.3 trillion, is designated for "entitlements." Entitlements is short for family related services. $250 billion=Social Security, $218 billion=Medicare, $2 billion=Workers Compensation, $500 million=Family Planning, $500 million on child delinquency programs, and hundreds of billions more on Medicaid, etc. All of these programs are also spent on the 91 million children and seniors of your example. Your example of the Health and Human Services Dept. over looks the Fed.'s remaining trillion dollars also spent on these other entitlements. This represents the problem with your "math"; you account for only a small portion of all government services and money spent on replacing the family. Additional trillions are further spent by the state, county, city and locale governments. We then have non-profit and community out-reach programs like marriage, criminal, and drug counseling, etc. These services are obviously there to help compensate for the break-down of the families natural support system. Much of our drug and other criminal problems are also an extension of the families demise. Yet, it's not enough. All of these government programs still do not account for the private-commercial programs covered under employer benefits, insurance entitlements and out-of-pocket expenses for such family related services as day-care for our kids and nursing homes for our parents. Even our social life along with the wining and dining of restaurants, bars, clubs and coffee houses are in partial compensation for the lost family gatherings of old. Without family, these activities are simply too time consuming to do at home. This is true of psychiatry and other counseling, they are in partial replacement of the families counsel. Totaling the cost for "ALL" of these government, private and non-profit programs provides us a clearer picture of the social context and economic value the average family provides our community. These combined services reveal the entire eco-system of family-care. Such a review begs the question: Can the family replace all of these other services on the same budget or less' What would happen to the family and the nation' Today, because of Mother*s Lib, you asked that question with your example of the Health and Human Services. This is our success. This is more then some abstract question of logic, a call for idealistic reform or demands for greater economic efficiency. It's about the very survival of the family institution now being ripped apart by today's social economic demands. The flip side is the issues of government waste and corruption against the shrinking budgets and greater demands. Part 2 of 4 - next week About the Author  Other Stories by this AuthorComment on this story Contact VNN about this storySend this story to a friend
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
