I was interested in your discussion of risk and its primacy (okay, second to “freedom” actually)in the neoliberal mind. This is everywhere. I recently read about a study of our city– and one of the “metrics” by which we were judged was how many start ups we had. There was much consternation because our start up rate was not as great as the cities we were being benchmarked against. But the other cities were more economically depressed! It is as if risk is an end in itself. The question was asked “what can we do to promote more start ups”?
Is there any going back? It seems like it should be self evident that more risk taking (on the part of the non elites. Elites don’t take risk) is not going to pull us out of this mess, but this idea seems to gain traction by the minute.
If I remember correctly, he did report on Gander Mountain’s rejection of tax subsidies.
Is more preventative care always better? I just finished reading a couple of books that question this assumption: Dr. Nortin Hadler’s Rethinking Aging and H. Gilbert Welch’s Overdiagnosed. They discuss various cancer screenings, treatment of mild hypertension, tight glycemic control of type 2 diabetes, etc.
On the other hand– I guess you could say that both books could present a powerful argument for more primary care physicians– giving PCPs the time to discuss costs and benefits to various treatments and screenings.
And both books do lay bare the profit motive behind many treatment guidelines. Hadler is particularly withering in his critique of contract research organizations.