Levels of privilege

[jp1]

I guess the question I'm asking is does it make a difference if we're talking about an "occasional" perquisite like a faculty lounge or airport high mile frequent flyer lounge versus something as basic as amenities at the person's home. Is it all the same or is there something 'wrong' with limiting access to perqs in some situations but not others? And is the right to something as basic as the right to use the front door of a building really just another perquisite or does it speak to injustice on a deeper level?

[flowerseverywhere]

I am old enough to remember restaurants and water fountains with "whites only" signs. Now that was ugly.

It it is easy to forget that most societies were built on the privileged exploiting to less priveliged. Poor people toil away in dirty dangerous factories while the owners and bosses reap the profits. Many of the U.S. founding fathers were salve owners. Modern day elected officials all over the world receive perks and favors we can only dream of.

it is my choice how hard I want to work and what I want to spend my money on. Communism, working for the collective good did not work out so well in Russia.

[Miss Cellane]

Is there some new kind of toll road? We have tolls on the interstates around here, but everyone has to pay them. People who get the transponder can occasionally go through a fast lane that doesn't require them to stop or slow down, but that's the only benefit I can see.

But this argument brings up something I've been thinking about. So many people have been dying from Ebola, yet most of the US citizens who have caught it have survived. I can't help thinking that is because, as a whole, people from the US are better fed, have had better health care all their lives than many or most of the victims in Africa. Because even the poorest in the US have some access to better food and health care than many in Africa.

Better health care after contracting Ebola is also a factor, but I've been wondering if just having a stronger, more robust immune system, developed through years of better eating and better medical care, isn't a factor as well.

That's a huge level of privilege.

[dmc]

I see nothing wrong with paying extra to get something extra. i belong to a private country club, I like to golf and generally the private clubs are much nicer. I'm an equity member so I have a stake in keeping things nice, as do the other members. And many here also pay extra to get to see the better doctors, they pay a few hundred a month for the doctor to accept them as patients. And they still have to make sure they accept their insurance.

But like Bae and his boat,I pass by some very nice jets at the airport next to my hangar for my lowly single engine plane. Why don't we all get to own jets?

[kib]

In general, I think that a) the culture has to completely change in order to be supportive of good health so that the paying-for-it part isn't as horrible as it is now and b) I believe that we each have a right to equal access to healthcare, just like we each have a right to equal access to voting.

This is the crux of the matter: where is the line drawn between rights and privileges, between needs and wants. When the line slides too far, it becomes a threat to a solid existence; for example, for a displaced Sudanese child to have to pay for clean water, even a sip from a hose, the line has shifted from wants (lemonade) to needs (drinking water).

I get it, even in that situation - or especially in that situation - if there is not enough for all, those with a sou will get what they need and those without will not, they will die. It's the ultimate example of supply and demand. But even in a society like ours where basic human rights are met for everyone, there is still an uneasy feeling if it seems that line is creeping closer to the bone. Today my lemonade is gone, tomorrow will I have anything to drink at all?

Although it grates to be a "have not" at times, I think it's important to recalibrate my feelings on occasion; am I envious of someone else's lemonade, or am I dying of thirst?

[catherine]

]
it is my choice how hard I want to work and what I want to spend my money on. Communism, working for the collective good did not work out so well in Russia.

With all due respect, that's like saying I'm going to stop driving a car because my Dodge Dart was a piece of crap. It's that kind of either-or thinking that will keep us from finding a way out of the atrocious inequalities and environmental devastation we have today. (I'm not picking on you, flowers.. the assumption that capitalism and a growth economy is the only way has been imprinted in our collective DNA)

I'm not an economist and I would find it difficult to articulate in this forum what some alternatives might be, but they do abound. Read Korten, Eisenstein, Piketty, Speth.

At the very least, the Danish people don't seem to be complaining about the high tax rate they have which provides cradle-to-grave security. They're the happiest country, and have been for several years.

[pinkytoe]

I think kib comes closest to understanding what I am trying to convey and apparently not getting across. Another line of thought occurs to me...maybe this is mostly about corporate profits being at the heart of many of these changes. And if that's the case...those who choose to pay extra might be the fools for blindly accepting and "paying" the price. As an example, one by one, highways in my city are being privatized and turned into tollways. These are roads that have already been paid for through federal and state funds/taxes but now turned over to corporations to "manage". Those of us who don't want to pay have the option in most cases but not all of driving "down below" on the access roads where we have to stop at those pesky stoplights. Another example...back to the airlines. On many carriers, one pays extra for early boarding, extra leg room, etc. Or one can save a little by sitting in the teeny-tiny seats back by the stinky toity. I seem to recall a time when all economy seats were the same size and price and the only separation was business/first class. Trying to think of other examples...

[kib]

That is the slippery slope of capitalism that I find worrisome, Pinky Toe. At the moment, capitalism is about the cost of lemonade (privileges). But it has crept into the cost of drinking water (rights, needs) wherever that has been made possible by corruption or scarcity. God Bless The USA and all that, but the only thing that's keeping our capitalism at the "lemonade level" is our overall level of wealth. And the further that level polarizes, the more it threatens the drinking water for the people on the bottom.

I think we're seeing this with health care. My worry is that as the cost of the deluxe package is raised to the breaking point - how much is IL willing to pay for her special process? Let's find out! - it causes creep in the overall cost. If IL can pay another $50K, surely it's not unreasonable to modify and then raise the cost $5K for everyone's care. Which is annoying if we're talking about internet or airline tickets, but it could be life threatening if it happens to an essential process.

[catherine]

=My worry is that as the cost of the deluxe package is raised to the breaking point - how much is IL willing to pay for her special process? Let's find out! - it causes creep in the overall cost.

I have done several market research studies on price sensitivity--what is the breaking point in cost at which doctor's won't prescribe it or payers won't cover it. And you can bet that when drugs are launched, it is at the apex of that breaking point, and not a dime less. Trouble is, no one is actually taking all the money out of their own pockets, so that threshold is wildly inflated.

[iris lilies]

I guess the question I'm asking is does it make a difference if we're talking about an "occasional" perquisite like a faculty lounge or airport high mile frequent flyer lounge versus something as basic as amenities at the person's home. Is it all the same or is there something 'wrong' with limiting access to perqs in some situations but not others? And is the right to something as basic as the right to use the front door of a building really just another perquisite or does it speak to injustice on a deeper level?

Your bus example removes the financial qualifier and makes it different from the other examples.

Housing is a good and service, it costs something, those who pay less get less. Park Ave side or 7th Ave side, one side is paying more than the other.