- The US has a higher share of global GDP than it did in 1890 / 1910, when it became the world's largest economy. It has the same share of global GDP as it did in 1980. That's despite a massive rise in GDP from emerging markets, former Soviet nations, etc.
- The US output on science, innovation, invention, is as high as it has ever been. US universities continue to be prodigious sources of output. US R&D expenditures are three times higher today (after adjusting for inflation), than in 1980.
- US manufacturing output is at an all-time high.
- The US still holds 40% to 45% of all global wealth.
- The US has one of the top five or six highest median incomes, and median disposable incomes. The strong dollar, much like during the 1990s, has returned a vast amount of purchasing power to US consumers and boosted incomes substantially versus the rest of the world. GDP just punched in at 3.7% growth, drastically beyond that of Europe, despite the strong dollar. While Europe and Japan have been mired in stagnation, the US has grown its economy substantially since 2007.
- Violent crime has been falling for basically 40 years.
- Reforms have begun around mass incarceration, with the prison population peaking and likely to begin a long-term decline. The war on drugs is ending. Equality on individual rights is far greater than it was 40 or 50 years ago.
- More people are covered by health insurance than at any other time in US history. That will continue to get better with gradual reforms and improvements in the system, including the ACA.
- Life expectancy for the US is at an all-time high, on par with Finland, Denmark and South Korea. Obesity has begun to finally decline, which will improve life expectancy rates further. Death by heart attack and stroke has plunged dramatically over the last 50 years. The US healthcare system is comparable to Canada in terms of quality and outcomes (but not cost) [1]. The US healthcare system is likely to improve a lot as the government bends costs down and broadens access.
- The poverty rate hasn't changed since 1980, and is similar to the late 1960s when the US was near the all-time peak of its economic power due to WW2.
[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2014/06/16/u-s-healthca...
"Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." ― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
Instead of complaining on Salon that the government should, using other people's money, do something about this problem. Why don't you go out there and do something yourself? Why don't you go out there a make a difference in the world?
Of course, in an ideal world we all have the means and the inclination to personally do something about all injustices. But we don't. In fact, I would argue that the person "complaining" about it is being more useful to their cause than you complaining about them complaining :)
Is there any way to estimate the frequency of these episodes of violence committed by mentally ill person who were not being treated? There was then, and continues to be, no national database that tracks homicides committed by mentally ill persons. However, a small study published in 1988 provided a clue. In Contra Costa County, California, all 71 homicides committed between 1978 and 1980 were examined. Seven of the 71 homicides were found to have been done by individuals with schizophrenia, all of whom had been previously hospitalized at some point before the crime. The 10% rate was also consistent with the findings of another small study in Albany County, New York. Therefore, by the late 1980s, it appeared that violent acts committed by untreated mentally ill persons was one of the consequences of the deinstitutionalization movement, and the problem appeared to be a growing one.
This basically gives P(Schizophrenic|CommitsHomicide), but the number of interest is P(CommitsHomicide|Schizophrenic). Bayes' Rule:
P(CommitsHomicide|Schizophrenic) = P(Schizophrenic|CommitsHomicide)P(CommitsHomicide)/P(Schizophrenic)
P(Schizophrenic|CommitsHomicide) = 7 / 71 (Very rough estimate from a single county 35 years ago)
P(CommitsHomicide) = ??? (I'm having trouble estimating this---the easily available figure is murder rate, but that's not the same as probability of being a murderer) But let's fudge this as being the murder rate of 4.7/100,000, which surely overshoots because some murderers kill multiple people [1]
P(Schizophrenic) = 15.2/100,000 [2]
Then we get P(CommitsHomicide|Schizophrenic) = 0.0986 * 0.000047 / 0.000152 = 0.0305
So very roughly three percent of people with schizophrenia would be expected to commit a murder. This is 649 times the probability of the average person being a murderer, which is quite a substantial difference.
However, in my opinion that increased likelihood of violence would not justify involuntary commitment in all but the most extreme cases. Otherwise we would essentially have to imprison tens of thousands of people for crimes that 97% of them are not going to commit. It's like Minority Report's "pre-crime", but a horribly inaccurate version thereof.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... [2]: http://epirev.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/67.full
