What are you currently reading?

[Daverz]

I have long favored a single-payer system for the US that provides a level of care roughly equal to that of Canada and which eliminates the horrifying waste caused by torts.

How much waste is caused by torts?  I remember that this was part of the HCR debate, such as it was, and tort reform accounted for a fairly insignificant savings overall (of the 14-15% of GDP we spend on healthcare).

I'm very suspicious of any kind of tort reform as the push for it usually seems to come from those wanting to protect themselves from any accountability.

Now back to books...



This is an early Ellroy, and I found it more enjoyable and human than some of his recent stuff.  I never managed to finish American Tabloid, his Kennedy Assassination novel.

[DavidRoss]

How much waste is caused by torts?

Accurate assessment is notoriously difficult.  Spinmeisters try to confuse matters by claiming that medical malpractice insurance and settlement costs account for less than 2% of health care costs.  But that's not the real issue.

The major expense comes from the practice of defensive medicine, ordering tests and procedures that aren't medically necessary but done to cover your ass in the event of lawsuits.  The costs get passed on to consumers, who have no incentive to care because their costs get passed on to insurers--who then pass them on in increased premium costs for everyone (for private insurance) or to the taxpayer (for public insurance).  Estimates of the cost of defensive medicine range from about 5% to more than 25% of all health care costs.

http://www.businessword.com/index.php/weblog/comments/3378

http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001536

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johnny-benjamin/healthcare-reform-and-def_b_243537.html

http://advance.uconn.edu/2009/090223/09022302.htm

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/728128

http://news.avancehealth.com/2010/07/defensive-medicine-costly-defense.html

http://www.aaos.org/news/aaosnow/nov08/managing7.asp
http://www.aaos.org/news/aaosnow/dec10/advocacy2.asp

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073002816.html

[Brian]

Well I've now completed my blog's survey of my five favorite books of 2010. Six, actually, because I snuck Don Quixote in there without numbering it...

Actual quote from one of the picks:
"A dentist! A dentist! My kingdom for a dentist!"

[Daverz]

Well I've now completed my blog's survey

Nice to make acquaintance with your bloggy personality.

[Florestan]

the Vatican is, rather improbably (and thanks to Mussolini), a sovereign nation. Basically, imagine if Glenn Beck became President and granted the Mormon temple in Salt Lake City its own government in exchange for telling all Mormons to do Beck's bidding forever, and you'll know why the Vatican is a country.

Way too simplistic an interpretation, I'm afraid --- and inaccurate: Vatican is not a nation, but a state.

(1). The seeds of the question of the legal international status of the Pope were planted in 1870, 13 whole years before Mussolini was born, by the liberal Kingdom of Italy.

(2) The Roman Catholic Church and the Papal States had a history of more than 1,000 years, inextricably intertwinned with that of Western civilization --- nothing whatsoever even remotely similar with Mormonism.

(3) Mussolini cleverly solved a problem he inherited, and just as any politician ever did, does, and will do, served his own interest in the process. Nothing exceptionally bad, nor exceptionally good in this.

[Brian]

Of course, that is my frankly simplistic summary - Robertson does give a whole chapter (18 pages) to the question and talks at length about the Papal States. Even his ultimate answer, which is essentially that it has enough pretences to statehood to protect it from prosecution, is nuanced.

You would have no way of knowing this from the blog, but I spent nearly all my teenage years playing a computer game depicting politics in medieval/early modern Europe, and am very familiar with the existence of the Papal States. This sounds kind of silly, to say "I played a computer game so I know the Papal States exist," but as I've found out this year in my master's in history program, Europe Universalis contained a lot of historical detail even many master's students don't know of. 

[karlhenning]

The Decline and Fall of Practically Everybody, Will Cuppy

If you haven't read it, you're only missing out . . . .

[Florestan]

Of course, that is my frankly simplistic summary - Robertson does give a whole chapter (18 pages) to the question and talks at length about the Papal States. Even his ultimate answer, which is essentially that it has enough pretences to statehood to protect it from prosecution, is nuanced.

TBH, I'm neither Roman Catholic nor particularly fond of the Papacy as institution. Actually, I regard papal's claim to sole and universal jurisdiction over the Church and to infallibility as pure heresies. Furthermore, the "legal" basis of the Papal States is constituted of proven forgeries such as Donatio Constantini and the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals. But neither can or will I ignore the undeniable contributions which the RCC brought to the development of arts and civilization.

You would have no way of knowing this from the blog, but I spent nearly all my teenage years playing a computer game depicting politics in medieval/early modern Europe, and am very familiar with the existence of the Papal States. This sounds kind of silly, to say "I played a computer game so I know the Papal States exist," but as I've found out this year in my master's in history program, Europe Universalis contained a lot of historical detail even many master's students don't know of. 

Oh, I'm sure that if historical details are well studied and implemented, a computer game can be more informative and accurate than a formal course offered by certain colleges. 

[Scarpia]

Though there are problems with Sorel, his Reflections on Violence captures well how 20th Century "liberalism" serves the ruling class and perpetuates the status quo.  Your objection takes the role of regulatory agencies like the EPA or FDA at face value.  Who they really serve and at whose expense is another matter entirely.  The same with entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

Your country and ours had virtually identical health care "systems" until the mid-'60s, with similar cost: about 6% of GDP.  You guys went with a national single payer plan.  We introduced Medicare and Medicaid, which screwed the pooch and introduced a huge "medical services for profit" system.  Today y'all spend about 10% of GDP on health care, we spend 18%--and Obamacare is already increasing our cost.  Taxpayer subsidized industries whose profits go into the pockets of the ruling class sure look like business as usual to me--so successful, in fact, that our masters want to bring ever more of our nation's economic life under government control--and thus their control.

What was it about Medicare and Medicaid that led to the increase in costs?

[jlaurson]

P.G. Wodehouse
Something Fishy
Everyman

[Taneyev]

Henry Temianka's "Facing the Music", a fascinating and extremely funny book of memories by that violinist, conductor and chamber player. Maybe he wasn't great on those matters, but certainly he was a fantastic writer.

[Todd]

I'm about a quarter of the way through Ron Chernow's big biography of George Washington.  I wanted a more detailed bio after reading Joseph Ellis' His Excellency: George Washington, but I didn't want to tackle a multi-volume set like Freeman's, so I settled on this newest one.  Chernow's bio of Alexander Hamilton was superb, and his House of Morgan is also excellent, and this newest volume is of comparable quality.  (Okay, the Hamilton bio strikes me as better.)  Very well written, well researched (with the obligatory nods to Freeman), it flows quickly and has not a few moments to make the reader chuckle.  There's nothing revelatory here, and some of his conclusions match Ellis', which is no surprise, and it does veer too much into psychological biography at times, but nonetheless, it is a superb read.  I look forward to a more detailed account of the political fights of the 1790s.

[Bogey]

I'm about a quarter of the way through Ron Chernow's big biography of George Washington.  I wanted a more detailed bio after reading Joseph Ellis' His Excellency: George Washington, but I didn't want to tackle a multi-volume set like Freeman's, so I settled on this newest one.  Chernow's bio of Alexander Hamilton was superb, and his House of Morgan is also excellent, and this newest volume is of comparable quality.  (Okay, the Hamilton bio strikes me as better.)  Very well written, well researched (with the obligatory nods to Freeman), it flows quickly and has not a few moments to make the reader chuckle.  There's nothing revelatory here, and some of his conclusions match Ellis', which is no surprise, and it does veer too much into psychological biography at times, but nonetheless, it is a superb read.  I look forward to a more detailed account of the political fights of the 1790s.

Todd,
We have about 20 books on Washington (or where he is highlighted as in Valley Forge reads) on the shelf and we were considering this one.  My wife is more up on this era than I am and passionately reads about it.  I read the Ellis book.  Though short, I found he did not waste any sentences, that is reading over a section quickly, even a sentence or two, forced me to go back and re-read.  Have not read the Freeman, but I did give a year+ of my life to the Flexner (here http://www.amazon.com/George-Washington-Forge-Experience-1732-1775/dp/0316285978/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294601657&sr=1-4). 

When we were at Williamsburg a few summers back, a gentleman at the book store there seemed extremely knowlegeable on books concerning this era.  For Washington, he recommended this one:



It has gotten so-so reviews so it fills space instead of my reading time.

A friend of mine got me this one for Christmas:



It seems like a fitting read for the winter months.  I may have to give it a start in the next week or so.

[bwv 1080]

Wife got me this for christmas & its a fantastic book, the author is a good writer and documents several trips to Siberia, including a drive from St Petersburg to Vladivostok.  He  fills in the history of the region from the Mongols to the gulags along the way and provides a good picture of modern Russia.

[Todd]

Though short, I found he did not waste any sentences, that is reading over a section quickly, even a sentence or two, forced me to go back and re-read.

Must agree about Ellis not wasting a sentence.  The book is very compact yet delivers a lot.  The Flexner looks interesting, the TR (Morris - with Colonel Roosevelt in my to-read stack), LBJ (Caro), and Cleveland (McElroy - not so good) aside, I have avoided multi-volume bios.  Too much time is needed, and there's so much to read.

My biggest challenge is finding a good bio of Jefferson.  I'm thinking of Ellis here, but what are the best options?

[karlhenning]

I'm about a quarter of the way through Ron Chernow's big biography of George Washington.  I wanted a more detailed bio after reading Joseph Ellis' His Excellency: George Washington, but I didn't want to tackle a multi-volume set like Freeman's, so I settled on this newest one.  Chernow's bio of Alexander Hamilton was superb, and his House of Morgan is also excellent, and this newest volume is of comparable quality.  (Okay, the Hamilton bio strikes me as better.)  Very well written, well researched (with the obligatory nods to Freeman), it flows quickly and has not a few moments to make the reader chuckle.  There's nothing revelatory here, and some of his conclusions match Ellis', which is no surprise, and it does veer too much into psychological biography at times, but nonetheless, it is a superb read.  I look forward to a more detailed account of the political fights of the 1790s.

Todd,

We have about 20 books on Washington (or where he is highlighted as in Valley Forge reads) on the shelf and we were considering this one.  My wife is more up on this era than I am and passionately reads about it.  I read the Ellis book.  Though short, I found he did not waste any sentences, that is reading over a section quickly, even a sentence or two, forced me to go back and re-read.  Have not read the Freeman, but I did give a year+ of my life to the Flexner (here http://www.amazon.com/George-Washington-Forge-Experience-1732-1775/dp/0316285978/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294601657&sr=1-4). 

When we were at Williamsburg a few summers back, a gentleman at the book store there seemed extremely knowlegeable on books concerning this era.  For Washington, he recommended this one:



It has gotten so-so reviews so it fills space instead of my reading time.

A friend of mine got me this one for Christmas:



It seems like a fitting read for the winter months.  I may have to give it a start in the next week or so.

Very interesting, gents.  I've seen the Chernow here at the museum shop, and I've been thinking about it.

[jlaurson]

P.G. Wodehouse
Money for Nothing
Everyman

[Bogey]

Must agree about Ellis not wasting a sentence.  The book is very compact yet delivers a lot.  The Flexner looks interesting, the TR (Morris - with Colonel Roosevelt in my to-read stack), LBJ (Caro), and Cleveland (McElroy - not so good) aside, I have avoided multi-volume bios.  Too much time is needed, and there's so much to read.

My biggest challenge is finding a good bio of Jefferson.  I'm thinking of Ellis here, but what are the best options?

Wow....difficult.  Not "one" one volume that I know of.  The Ellis is on my wife's list to read....believe that is where I would start.  Just asked the Mrs. and her favorite book so far on him has been:



It has a focus on the house within.  Mine would be:



and the wine discussions, that were throughout the book were not the draw to keep me interested, but rather the side cavitates that were woven in.

In short, I do not have a good answer for you , Todd.  With Jefferson I tend to lean toward books that have a specific focus....and with Washington, I can go either way.  FWIW, the Ken Burns documentary was well done.  My next Jefferson book will probably either be:

 

See what I mean by a specific angle.  However, Adams' and Jefferson's relationship fascinates me.  Too many books, Todd.  But fortunately, there seems to be more to choose from during this era than ever before.

[Henk]

Just finished Duel by Joost Zwagerman. Very nice book.

[Todd]

In short, I do not have a good answer for you , Todd.

The general impression I get is that no one volume work suffices.  Thanks for the suggestions, though, I now have more options to consider.