4A - Wednesday, October 3, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com 4A - Wednesday, October 3, 2012 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom 0 C4C f idhigan 4:a1*1 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890. 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com TIMOTHY RABB JOSEPH LICHTERMAN and ADRIENNE ROBERTS ANDREW WEINER EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors. FROM T HE DAILY Hold Adidas accountable 'U' may need to respond with concrete action didas is one of the University's largest partners in athletic gear and one of the largest companies in its industry. But recent controversy regarding the company's working con- ditions in Indonesia has elicited a response from University Pres- ident Mary Sue Coleman. In a letter to the corporation, Coleman stated her disappointment with its compensation for workers after the unanticipated closure of the PT Kizone factory. Coleman also outlined the University's expectations for Adidas moving forward. While this is a commendable gesture, it's crucial that the University reconsider its relationship with the company. The University must respond with concrete action if Adidas fails to respect the situation of all its employees. Cut through campaign talk recently came across a Wash- ington Post column, "The truth deficit from both campaigns." In this column, Robert Samu- elson details what each cam- paign isn't tell- ingus about the true economic situation of the country. Cov- HARSHA ered up by cam- NAHATA paign rhetoric, both candidates are ignoring blatant truths that may threaten the economic future of the country. President Barack Obama, accord- ing to Samuelson, conveniently, refrains from discussing the larger issue of the uncontrollable growth of Social Security and Medicare, and how these programs are quick- ly becoming unsustainable burdens on the federal budget. If these poli- cies are kept as is, they would result in a total added deficit of $10 tril- lion between 2013 and 2022. It is also estimated that by 2022, the deficit is expected to be $1.4 trillion - 5.5 percent of U.S. GDP. Obama's plans to tax higher income sector and revenue still won't close the gap, even if income tax rates are raised as high as 49.6 percent of income. According to Third Way - a think tank striving to answer America's tough ques- tions - if Social Security and Medi- care see no change, tax increases of up to 60 percent are 'inevitable' for the middle class. No matter how it's sugarcoated, the truth remains that eventually Social Security and Medicare will overtake the GDP to the point of financial instability. But no one wants to tell us that. The facts aren't being hidden on one side alone. Samuelson pins Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney for stretching the truth and mitigating the bad as well..Romney's goal to cut the fed- eral budget by 20 percent isn't via- ble, Samuelson says. For Romney to do so, he would have to make dras- tic cuts to significant social pro- grams, like the Center for Disease Control, the FBI and border author- ities. Moreover, Romney's claim to provide tax cuts won't work. The need for revenue is so great that to close the gap, an increase in rates is necessary. Since 1972, tax revenue has only made up 18 percent of GDP. This has to increase if the goal is to curb deficit spending. Again, the point is made that unless programs like Social Secu- rity and health expenditures are railed in, there isn't a comprehen- sive solution to the growing deficit and debt. This is something that neither campaign wants to admit. What stuck out to me about Sam- uelson's column weren't the glaring truths that we as a nation have yet to face - that's a debate for a later time. What was striking was the fact that we continue to be oblivi- ous to these issues. The structures and programs we have in place are quickly becoming outdated and unsustainable, and yet we keep trying to convince ourselves that maybe if enough Band-Aids are used, we'll be able to magically make the problem disappear. It's no surprise that campaigns are catering to what people want to hear, but it's concerning when we - the American public - don't want to hear the harsh reality of the policy decisions facing us today. The rea- son candidates won't tell us these hard truths is because they don't think doing so will win them votes. They don't believe we want to hear the truth. This isn't the first time that an article like Samuelson's column has been written. The reality is that in the upcoming years, we as a nation are going to have to face tough cuts to many programs that people have come to love and rely on. But those cuts have to be made. And the soon- er they're made, the better. We need to demand the truth from politicians. As Thomas Friedman described in a Dec. 25, 2010 column in The New York Times, Kasim Reed, mayor of Atlanta, recognized this and made the tough cuts needed to balance the budget. Reed was quot- ed as saying, "The bottom line is that for the country to do and to be what we have been ... there mustbe a gen- eration tough enough to stick out its chin and take the hit. It is time to begin having the types of mature and honest conversations necessary to deal effectively with the new eco- nomic realities we are facing as a nation. We simply cannot keep kick- ing the can down the road." Now, the solution isn't to take an ax to the budget, cutting anything and everything. But, it's also not fair to keep delaying the conversa- tion with campaign promises to save programs that at some point will need to be significantly pared down. As Reed said, it's about being honest about the conversations we need to have and the position we're 'in. Though, for the American public to get that honesty, we must start demanding it from our politicians, election season or not. - Harsha Nahata can be reached at hnahata@umich.edu. 0 After the April 2011 closure of the PT Kizone factory in Indonesia, Adidas didn't compensate more than 2,700 workers with the required $1.5 million in salaries, ben- efits and severance. Instead, the company attempted to place this responsibility on the factory owner. This neglect prompted action from the University of Wisconsin and Cornell University. Adidas has since announced plans to discuss future steps with other corpora- tions and insurance companies. However, the company's poor and delayed response to the issue warranted a reaction from Coleman. The letter called for humanitarian aid as well as monthly updates on the company's interac- tion with PT Kizone, employment for former workers and collaboration with the Indone- sian government. This letter is an important step in giving attention to an issue we're all connected to. It's especially important for our school to send the right message, as the University is in agood position to exert influence. The con- tract between Michigan and Adidas is worth $7.5 million each year. Over the course of the contract, the University will earn $60 mil- lion. The University should make use of its clout in this area and promote a change in Indonesian working conditions. Coleman's letter is a compelling call for humane corporate practices. However, the mistreatment of factory workers is hardly a new concern, and it requires adequate responses. Adidas' negligence has already driven the University of Wisconsin to file a lawsuit. Similarly, Cornell University sev- ered its relationship to the corporation sev- eral days ago. Michigan should certainly keep both of these developments in-mind and fol- low suit if necessary. Although Michigan's contract with Adi- das does not expire until 2017, we should seriously consider changing sponsors if the company doesn't correct its mistreatment of workers . This dispute is especially unaccept- able considering the contract's terms regard- inghuman rights. Adidas' currentmisconduct is similar to that of Nike, Michigan's previous vendor. Just as Michigan switched sponsors in 2007, we should consider the same course if the workers's needs are not met. The circumstances in Indonesia require concrete action, if not on the part of Adidas, then by the University itself. President Cole- man's letter is admirable, and will hopefully inspire genuine change. But, if Adidas contin- ues to mistreat these former employees, the University should use its predominant posi- tion in the world of athletic sponsorship to promote necessary change. 6 ELI CAHAN| Don't blame the doctors EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS Kaan Avdan, Sharik Bashir, Eli Cahan, Nirbhay Jain, Jesse Klein, Melanie Kruvelis, Patrick Maillet, Harsha Nahata, Timothy Rabb, Adrienne Roberts, Vanessa Rychlinski, Sarah Skaluba, Michael Spaeth, Gus Turner BRANDON SHAW I An ode to The Boss Bruce Springsteen last performed in Ann Arbor 32 years ago today, and I'd like to use the anniversary as an opportunity to express my adoration for him and his music. But more importantly, I want to attempt to explain why Springsteen, who turned 63 a little more than a week ago, is in fine pitch with the tune of America and the world today. At 63, Spingsteen is still performing shows that last more than four hours; he is cajoling, screaming, running, sliding, whispering, beck- oning and then doing it all over again. When asked why the show exemplifies the true con- cept of a performance, he has often said that he's "in a lifelong conversation with [his] audi- ence; the theatrics are a necessary part of tell- ing our story, of connecting together." But it isn't the four-hour shows that please his fans. It's his ability, in all of the tenets of a live performance and each facet of what he does to remain, by a long measure, the most rel- evant artist of our day. Many front men today utilize similar stage theatrics and attempt to convey the emotion like Springsteen. They make political referenc- es and form connections with their audience. But Springsteen, though he has backed Demo- cratic causes and candidates his entire life, continues to be so relevant for the same reason he isn't publically endorsing a candidate this election cycle. He's the physical embodiment of America - discomforted by too much instabil- ity to remain one-sided, divided and overly con- cerned with politics to take a stance. Even in the self-mockery of the live performance, as he laughs off his own fortune: "People at the top, these rich guitar players, have been given a free pass!" Springsteen recognizes that no politici- zation or professional metaphor can equate to the intensely emotional and personal journey of pain and loss that Americais going through. In the Gaelic-driven warning tale, "Dea'th to my Hometown," he cautions a "sonny boy" to "listen up" and "be ready when they come," so he better "get yourself a song to sing; sing it till you're done. Sing it hard and sing it well; send the robber barons straight to hell. Whose crimes have gone unpunished now; walk the streets as free men now." Springsteen is part youthful performer who instills a minted vigor and thirst for answers in every show-goer in the room. But he has also found his part as the wise older Springsteen, intent on nailing life lessons into his audience, and the convergence of these two is precisely why he remains so relevant. Bruce Springsteen is the personification of the cultural identity of America: what America is meant to be, what it's become and the mea- surement of the distance between the two. He exemplifies what America needs and what it doesn't have: unity, a culture of acceptance, an impeccable, unparalleled work ethic and a community that embraces and helps each other out. The only mentions of politics throughout the live show's stories on the current Springsteen tour are when they are equated to the loss of people's jobs, relatives, close friends and identi- ties. "I'm gonna do this for our ghosts aind for yours," Springsteen says each night, because "if you're here, and we're here then they're here." Happy Birthday, Bruce. Thanks for being here each night. And thanks, for everything. Brandon Shaw is an LSA junior. The Wall Street Journal recently ran two articles on the changing tendencies of medicine. The first, flaunting pictures of surgeons and scalpels, proudly and bluntly pro- claimed that medicine has more preventable and disguised errors than any other profession. It accused medicine of cheating the system of criticism, and holding itself above efforts to streamline and perfect. The second, dominated bythe portraitofa physician, subtly (Not!) remarked on a "doctor to the top percent." It told the story of a referral base for the rich and cor- porate medicine. And it set up a tale of selfish medicine, of exploitation and bureaucracy. So what's really going on? Are doctors conspiring to charge higher fees, to spend less time with each patient at the same time as seeing more patients, to neglect admitting mistakes on purpose, to commit Medicare fraud and to reject Medi- care patients, all so that they can go home sooner with fatter wallets? Obviously, that's not what's hap- pening. There's a lot of confusion about the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare. The fact is simple - it won't work, for the same reasons that doctors are already charging higher fees and spending less time with each patient. Let's discuss why it won't fly, at least in the way Obama intends it to. First, define how he intends Obam- acare to work: about 25 percent more of the nation will receive the necessary care they deserve, sim- ply because they are human beings. Now that's a novel idea - everyone deserves care when they're ill. The problem is where care is coming from when provided. It's provided by doctors and by individuals. So, why is that a problem? Train- ing to become a doctor is the sin- gle most time, dollar, brain-cell and life-consuming professional development curve since becom- ing a referee in the National Foot- ball League. On average, doctors come out of training at age 32 indebted an estimated $280,000. They work 80-hour weeks (if you think hospitals really follow the new resident rules which, I can tell you from observing, they don't). And it doesn't include time spent researching, reviewing charts, doing paperwork and any time "off call" spent in the hospital. Again, why does this matter? It's important because medical schools are not increasing class sizes, not significantly increasing nation- ally in number and not decreasing training requirements. What does all of this point to? By 2015, there is an expected shortage of 63,000 doctors across the nation. Training for doctors isn't becoming any eas- ier, shorter or cheaper. Couple that with the 44-percent increase (from 50.7 to 73.2 million) in covered patients by 2025, and that spells trouble with a capital "T." Let's just wave the white flag now. Back to The Wall Street Jour- nal articles - what does all of this signify for medicine? It means two things: first, that doctors accepting Medicare will spend even less time with patients. Less time means less engagement, insight and foresight. Those factors add up to more pre- ventable mistakes, since the focus would be on quantity, not quality. Not that the quality w'ould be poor, just that it will be worse than it is currently. Second, it means that a larger contingency of doctors will switch to private practice. All in all, this symbolizes the fragmentation of medicine by class divisions. It means more low-income patients will wait lon- ger for care, provided that they will indeed, at some point in time, receiveit.And it points towards the privatization of the "boutique phy- sician," who will provide brilliant care for wealthy patients. Is this S-graph of medicine really what we want? Maybe; most doc- tors are amazingly intelligent and diligent people, who, despite the obstacles thrust upon them, will pursue perfection as they always have. But to accuse them of selfish- ness and conspiracy is outrageous. The well-publicized issues of medi- cine are derived from external pressures, not internal motivations. I've been advised more than once (or twice or three times) not to go into medicine for the money but to do it because it's "the good fight." With that knowledge, I refute the fact that doctors are acting solely in their own interest. The whole reason they went into medicine is to care for others, and there was no sudden change of heart convincing all physicians otherwise. I'm all in support of expanding care to the masses, but we need to look at the cogs of the operation as well. Ulti- mately, we need to redefine how to care for those who care for us. We must care enough about them to let them care enough for us. Eli Cahan is a sophomore in the Ross School of Business. 6 CONTRIBUTE TO THE COVERSATION Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor and viewpoints. Letters should be fewer than 300 words while viewpoints should be 550-850 words. Send the writer's full name and University affiliation. to tothedaily@michigandaily.com. @MittRomney One shot for every time you change your stance at the debate tonight. #Blockoutinl0 #Fun WednesdayNight -@michdailyoped 0 £ a i