With lyrics such as…
All the gold, and the guns in the world, couldn't get you off
All the gold, and the guns, and the girls, couldn't get you off
All the boys, all the choices, in the world
And a chorus repeating the line… Is it ever gonna be enough?
…the song appears to be a simple commentary on human inability to be satisfied. It can easily be seen as fairly standard artistic criticism of a rat-race consumer society.
The Bigger Picture
I think a larger theme comes from the song that deconstructs its seemingly obvious interpretation. The constant pursuit of additional satisfaction can be compared to a Ponzi scheme where the pseudo-pyramid nature of the scheme ultimately must crash. We have all been taught that Ponzi schemes are some of the worst forms of financial shenanigans.
However, what is often not provided as context is that almost all of nature has Ponzi scheme attributes. Each generation of creatures must always seek to replicate themselves or else the species goes extinct.
Because nature is not master planned, this desire to replicate is generally an instinctive desire that each individual pursues. And, some basic reading of biology shows that natural populations do boom and bust at times for various reasons. The pyramidal growth crashes. Then, if the creatures are successful, the growth begins again. However, if growth doesn’t restart, the creatures are at great risk of extinction because they are unable to replace themselves.
So, one potential answer to Metric’s “Is it ever gonna be enough?” question is, “No, and we thank Mother Nature everyday that this is so.” Without the constant desire for better, faster, more, our society will not survive.
So What?
Government spending on entitlements can be viewed as a form of Ponzi/Pyramid scheme. Retirement and health care benefits for an older generation are paid primarily from taxes on younger, working generations. As long as population is growing or at least balanced between generations, this can be made to work.
However, as Mark Steyn points out in an essay this week, there are many countries where populations are not being replaced (here’s Wikipedia’s article on Sub-Replacement Fertility if you don’t believe Steyn’s numbers). To quote Steyn, “Greece has a fertility rate of about 1.3: Ten grandparents have six kids have four grandkids — ie, the family tree is upside down.”
So, it is easy to predict where expanding entitlement programs can lead because all we have to do is watch TV scenes of protests and riots in Greece. The financial crisis there is requiring radical action on the deficit and the now-dependent populace is saying "No, we want to keep ours" even though it was never really theirs to begin with.
It will be interesting to see how long the wealthier countries in Europe (e.g. Germany) are willing to foot the bill for poorer countries with higher government entitlements. Personally, I am rooting for the Irish to figure out the systemic nature of this and realize that the same lower tax, free market policies which made Ireland a boom economy for a while will be the policies to extricate themselves from the trap.
Now, The Punch Line
Generally, the Metric lyric “Is it ever gonna be enough?” would be used to criticize “right-wing” support for capitalism and consumerism. How big a bonus does a CEO need to be happy? How many mansions does one person need?
But, at the societal level, it is actually the Left that perpetrate the greatest of the Ponzi schemes by creating these entitlements. Social Security and Medicare have uncertain futures already and can only be extended by taxing more of certain Americans to pay for others. Adding a government run healthcare entitlement to this will likely exacerbate and accelerate the problem. But, for the Left, it is never enough. They want to just keep pushing for more. They even push for it over clear, vocal opposition from the voters who the programs are intended to serve. This is irrationality.
While not wishing ill on anyone, I hope the Europeans crash quickly. A quicker crash will likely be less painful for them and we in the U.S. can learn the lesson from them rather than on our own.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
E. Magill
T.S.
old new lefty
rwnutjob
Max Frank
thatsright
Salon.com
Comments
The demography problem is ugly everywhere in the Developed World. Japan and Russia are shrinking, and China will face hideous issues like the ones you point out. Let us hope the politicians see the light, and not have a Diamond like moment in collapse.
I find this extremely hilarious, considering Social Security is, was and will still for some time be - In Surplus.
The Social Security problem is years away, and could be easily resolved. Even easier if the Conservatives" hadn't spent the money to help...a tiny bit... cover their fondness for massive debt.
Social Security won't destroy the American economy. It can't.
Conservative ideology has already done that.
As to healthcare...could anything the 'left" does do more to distort the market, raise costs and limit choice than what the "conservatives" with their (anything but) Free Market dogma have already done?
No, the left...as bad as you think they are...could never cause as much crippling economic decline as "conservatism" has already accomplished.
Conservatism, thy name is "irrationality."
File this post under: Chutzpah
As to the broader healthcare topic, it is not logical to blame the free market when healthcare and its associated health insurance are highly regulated and subsidized (see Medicare) parts of the economy (maybe even the highest). They are not even close to being free. As I have acknowledged your point on social security, let's see if you can acknowledge this fact so that we can stop a phony debate about free versus unfree. All the healthcare reform bill is now is trading one form of bad regulation for another worse one.
Finally, as Europeans are experiencing, it is the combination of all of these entitlements that can bring government budget and economic crises. The good news is that we will have evidence building whether the EU can sustain its spending. Right now, Greece is in big trouble and others may be right behind them. You may not believe me but you might believe your own eyes.
There's no sense in defending Medicare's solvency, but that isn't a result of an un-free market. Medicare is a victim of rising healthcare costs, as is the entire HC system. The function itself is, even with the waste, a more efficient model than its private counterpart. The most easily dealt with defect in our HC model is private insurance, as it is the least important and most inefficient element.
The problem here, I think, is that you see regulation as being against the free market. That frozen and simplistic ideology is what caused our economic demise, as deregulation enabled regulatory capture, obscure contracts and obscene levels of leveraging.
So, my (anything but) free markets comment. Regulation is essential to free markets...in the real world sense, which seems to be the operative template.
Rational unregulated markets are a fantasy to be pondered in an academic, Libertarian Utopian philosophical conversation... or in the blathering, uneducated rants of the street level ideologues.
As to healthcare insurance - privatization is the worst model in the real world, and that has been proven true from the beginning of medical care that was advanced enough to be largely unaffordable without insurance.
As to the current proposed plan being an "entitlement," that would seem to be true in the worst way. It does nothing substantial to control costs, so looks more to taxing for costs rather than focusing on savings. The easiest savings would be to install the "public option," and let it compete with the private plans, that would, due to their inability to compete, be reduced to providing services "over and above" public insurance, or perhaps administering public insurance.
The problem with Obama's plan is...it's too "free market," and that's why the costs would continue to rise...those costs we both see as "entitlement" in the worst connotation.
We need real market efficiency, not inefficient ideological satisfaction.