Cars today are far safer than they were 40 years ago. And that’s a problem — at least in one respect. Since cars are safer, people drive more poorly. A reinforcing feedback loop exists as well. Since I pulled out in front of you and your new, high powered brakes allowed you to go from 60 to 15 in 2 seconds, then I can pull out in front of lots of people like you. Since I didn’t use my turn signal and no one hit me, why bother to take my hand from my cell phone or double tall latte to use that indicator switch?
It’s really no wonder then that, while cars get safer, highway fatalities remain the same. Safer cars create bad behavior and bad habits, since there is less cost to getting it wrong.
This is also true of other social problems in the country, where improving the situation has led to unintended consequences. We are a wealthy country. And one of our biggest poverty problem is not starvation, or food insecurity it’s obesity. “The highest rates of obesity occur among population groups with the highest poverty rates and the least education” according to Drewnoski and Specter. We have nobly subsidized food, particularly corn and other inputs to factory processed food, and made food inexpensive. The result is we are the only country that has an obesity problem tied to poverty. There are over 1 Billion food insecure people in the world, it’s no wonder that some of them struggle to understand us.
There are more examples. Since it is really hard to starve in this country, it’s no longer that important to get an education. We are the most successful economy and political system in the world today, but we have a lower percentage of high school graduates than Panama, Mauritius, Korea, and Australia. While we have yet to realize it on an individual basis, our graduation rates have fallen behind Tajikistan. I suspect it’s much more difficult to obtain an education in Tajikistan, where 20% of the population lives on less than $1.25 a day, yet more people do it.
A social infrastructure that protects the less fortunate is incredibly important. Some folks fall on hard times. Others may never be able to get back on their feet again. But in aggregate, across the US population, if we lower the cost of adverse behavior, it seems obvious that we will continue to get adverse behavior. A “social safety net” works best when there are people attempting the tightrope that is above it. The net catches the missteps, the falls, the injuries. Then, the system should provide a ladder to access the tightrope again, and an encouraging audience clapping for more attempts.
That system, let’s call it the “Investing in America” system, will generate more tightrope walkers. And tightrope walkers (or less euphemistically, entrepreneurs, scientists, knowledge workers and service providers) earn lots more money than safety net sitters. That allows us to reinvest in better safety nets and ladders. Thus, no tightrope walkers, no money for safety nets.
Sean Foote's Blog 