unSILOed with Greg LaBlanc

Anthropology professor Brian Fagan discusses how civilizations historically adapted to climate change, the role of climate in the rise and fall of societies, and the importance of learning from the past to tackle future climate challenges. They explore ancient fishing artifacts, meteorological records in ancient societies, and the impact of climate change on human ingenuity and societal structures across different civilizations.

Brad Wilcox, a sociology professor and director of the National Marriage Project, discusses the importance of marriage in societal well-being. They explore the impact of shifting societal norms on marriage decisions, the soulmate myth, gender roles, and the benefits of strong marriages. The conversation delves into the significance of extended family involvement, the challenges facing marriage in modern society, and the need to educate elites on the benefits of marriage for overall societal well-being.

Emeritus professor David Barash discusses the resistance in social sciences to studying human nature, violence, sex differences, and the risks of nuclear deterrence. The conversation also explores deception in animal communication and the intersection of literature with evolutionary wisdom.

Applied mathematician Coco Krumme and Greg LaBlanc explore the negative impacts of excessive optimization on essential human values and spontaneity. They discuss ethical trade-offs, the lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic, and question the fabric of modern living. The conversation delves into the pillars of optimization, the influence of corporations on personal life optimization, and the balancing act between efficiency and life in an optimization culture.

Political science professor Anna Maria Grzymala-Busse discusses the role of religion in shaping politics, including religious authorities' power over rulers, the influence on taxation, and modern politics. They explore the unique relationship between religion and politics in the United States and the impact of religious diversity. Examining historical research and contemporary analysis, they emphasize the continuity of human nature in societal concepts.

Geoffrey Hodgson and Greg delve into how Darwinian economics can explain historical shifts, the evolution of legal and financial institutions, and why traditional economic theories fall short in complex social systems. They discuss the theory of firms, the rapid evolution of institutions, and the impact of behavioral economics on traditional models.

David Toomey, Professor and Co-Director of the PWTC Program at the University, discusses the evolutionary parallels between improv and life's unpredictability. He explores the broader implications of play, challenging the separation of creation and judgment, and its profound impact on self and the world.

Linda Colley, history professor, and author discuss how constitutions borrowed from each other, the evolution of their purpose, and Britain's influence. They delve into historical context, global adoption, Ramahan Roy's vision for India, Latin American constitutions, and Brexit's impact on British identity.

Professor Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford Medical School and economics department discusses the ethical boundaries of public health compliance, the impact of lockdowns on global poverty, the lab leak theory's influence on global policy, and the unseen effects of the pandemic response on society.

How complex are the dynamics of employer-based insurance? Is the time ripe for a radical transformation towards universal basic healthcare—a move that could potentially curb the spiraling expenses and offer stable access to care?Amy Finkelstein is the John & Jennie S. MacDonald Professor of Economics at MIT and the author and co-author of several books including We've Got You Covered: Rebooting American Health Care andRisky Business: Why Insurance Markets Fail and What to Do About It.Greg and Amy discuss the truth behind America's healthcare conundrum. Amy peels back the layers of the nation's healthcare system, exposing the patchwork structure that's left millions without stable insurance and grappling with soaring costs. Amy lays out the progression of medical practices and the government's shifting role in health insurance. Greg asks about the effects of cost-sharing in systems with universal coverage, and they weigh the pros and cons of mandates versus automatic health insurance provision*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:Why did insurance get so highly insecure and highly uncertain?05:59: Almost everyone who's privately insured, which is about half the population as you said, is getting their insurance through their employer. And that actually can create a fair amount of this uncertainty, this insurance turnover. If you lose your job, change your job, retire, become ill (and therefore lose your job), you can lose your health insurance. And that's not a particularly sensible way to design a health insurance system. The very purpose of health insurance is to provide some modicum of economic and financial security in an insecure and uncertain world. So it's quite perverse from our perspective that health insurance is itself highly insecure and highly uncertain. And you asked, why did it get that way? I think because, there was never a "let's start with a clean slate and figure out how to build a coherent system" moment.The true purpose of universal health coverage48:15: We're arguing that we wouldn't have to raise taxes to provide universal basic coverage that fulfills sort of our commitment to access to essential medical care, regardless of resources. But we're not arguing, nor do I think it would be true, that this is actually going to save money. But again, this notion: when people advocate, we're going to do something to save money. So often, that's both a bit of a stretch, but it's also, I think, a bit of a distraction in the sense that the purpose of most policies is not to save money. It's to accomplish an objective, and we pay for that objective. We don't say we're having national defense to save money. We're having it to be secure. Similarly, the purpose of health insurance is not to save money; it's always nice if you do, but it's to ensure access to essential medical care, regardless of resources.Why do people find it hard to invest in preventive care?52:02: In general, there's a sense that it's hard to get people to take their statins to lower their cholesterol after a heart attack, even if those statins are free – so it's not about financing. And why? One of the theories is, well, you've got a lot going on in your life, and when you don't take the statin, there's no immediate feedback loop. You don't immediately have a heart attack. And so you don't see the benefit, and that makes it harder to remember…[52:48] Part of the reason it's hard to get people to invest in preventive care is because the returns are not so salient or obvious. You have to believe the evidence and remember it all the time, as opposed to seeing with your own eyes what's happening when you change your behavior.What does health insurance really mean?08:53: The term health insurance is a bit of a misnomer. Health insurance doesn't actually insure your health. It's not providing the fountain of youth. Instead, it provides economic or financial protection against the medical costs of poor health.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Gross Domestic ProductAn Act for the relief of sick and disabled seamenFriedrich HayekMassachusetts Health Care ReformCharles MurrayAlexander HamiltonAffordable Care ActGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at MITProfile on WikipediaProfile on NBERHer Work:Amazon Author PageWe've Got You Covered: Rebooting American Health CareRisky Business: Why Insurance Markets Fail and What to Do About ItMoral Hazard in Health InsuranceGoogle Scholar PageMIT Economics Publications List