The Precipice Few See
Readers ask what I propose as solutions to the problems I explore. This is a natural question, especially in America, where the zeitgeist holds that there are solutions to every problem, and all we need to do is be positive, innovate, work hard and solutions will manifest.
In the spirit of productive dialog, I’ve often discussed solutions in the 20 years I’ve been writing Of Two Minds. Proposing solutions is easy, actually fixing problems is the hard part, and though it is taboo in America’s culture of solutions abound, I see all the proposed systemic solutions as doomed for reasons inherent to human nature and the structure of the system we inhabit.
In other words, the only solutions that might move the needle are private or localized. Sweeping solutions are pipe dreams, but the mythology of our era demands that comprehensive systemic solutions are always within reach, if only we do the work and grasp the brass ring.
Solutions in America tend to come in three flavors: technological, MBA-managerial and policy.
The technological flavor is the most highly prized and sought after because it’s painless and profitable: add some sensors, conjure some code, and voila, the problem disappears. Everyone loves an engineering/tech fix.
The MBA solution is also highly valued and sought after because it’s basically social-financial engineering: review some case studies, streamline some corporate operations, leverage a buyout, retrain employees, and voila, gushers of profits, productivity increases, those at the top of the heap are delighted, and those who lost out are easily ignored collateral damage.
Policy is understood to be messy due to the necessity for compromise and tedious legalese, but policy is Solutions Nirvana for two reasons: 1) the government can force change via regulations. penalties, fines, lawsuits, etc., so those who disagreed have to comply anyway and 2) big sweeping policy changes offer the grandest possible stage for public relations coups: we did it, we solved the problem with our signatures.
Alas, human nature has been selected to favor expedient, short-term responses designed to limit pain and sacrifice in the present moment, responses that consume the least amount of energy / effort possible.
In a system that defines problems, solutions and pain in financial metrics–money, which is a measure of time, effort, energy, cost and gain–then a solution that yields a financial gain is favored over any fix that demands financial costs and sacrifices.
When we have a medical emergency, we know something is no longer working correctly. Maybe we ignored the warning signs and indulged–without being fully aware of the risks–in wishful thinking, that the problem would fix itself in some magical way, or go away on its own. The emergency forces us to a reckoning with reality: we’re seriously injured, ill, etc.
The solution is often arduous and costly, demanding sacrifices and pain, and in all cases, would have been more easily addressed had we taken the warning signs more seriously rather than dismiss them as “it’s always been like this” or “things that will go away on their own.”
This is an analogy for the present era.
Our system is no longer working, and the “solution” that’s viewed as the one that generates the least pain for those in charge is play-acting: let’s pretend there is no problem (by gaming statistics and claiming new technologies will fix everything). If necessary, then let’s play-act the passage of “reforms” that we tout as systemic solutions rather than expedient fixes that ultimately make the problem worse.
There are many words to describe this substitution of play-acting for authentic solutions: artifice, propaganda, simulacra, facsimile, and so on.
This substitution is a satisfactory fix because we all understand “let’s pretend” from childhood play-acting, and the play-acting enables us to avoid the pain of recognizing the difficulty or even impossibility of addressing the problem without long-term pain and sacrifice. So everyone with any authority loves “let’s pretend.”
Let’s pretend “insurance” is actually insurance rather than a simulacrum of coverage that’s actually a convoluted profit center, or phantom insurance with sky-high deductibles. Let’s pretend there’s a technological solution to every problem. Let’s pretend “the market” solves all problems seamlessly, for example, healthcare:
The Gilded Age of Medicine Is Here: Health insurers and hospitals increasingly treat patients less as humans in need of care than consumers who generate profit.
“2024 was arguably the year that the mortal dangers of corporate medicine finally became undeniable and inescapable. In recent years, health-care corporations have embraced an approach that can only be described as gamification.”
Could this extraordinary increase in hospital costs and healthcare be somehow related to private equity’s takeover of the healthcare “industry”? Hmm… nope, let’s pretend this is just “the market” finding the optimum solution, at least for those who own the “assets,” which include not just hospitals, land, insurers and medical practices but our illnesses.
Let’s pretend that “the smartest people in the room” can solve any problem because, well, they’re “the best and the brightest.” Let’s pretend that policy tweaks–a new batch of regulations or eliminating a batch of regulations–will solve the underlying structural dynamics of unsustainable trends.
People sense this artifice but they fear any reform radical enough to actually change the underlying dynamics.
CHS NOTE: I understand some readers object to paywalled posts, so please note that my weekday posts are free and I reserve my weekend Musings Report for subscribers. Hopefully this mix makes sense in light of the fact that writing is my only paid work/job. Who knows, something here may change your life in some useful way. I am grateful for your readership and blessed by your financial support.