Position Statement & Current Event Nomination – Liberty

Position Paper Prompt:
Suppose you recently bought a company that pays a fixed dollar subsidy toward employees’ monthly health insurance premiums, but that those premiums
are significantly higher for those who (admit they) smoke. Using the module’s terminology, you might reason that smokers’ liberty to smoke is the origin of
the higher shared cost pollution of the employees’ “common pool(ed) resources” to pay healthcare costs. You might also reason that if properly calibrated,
the higher premium that smokers are being charged could offset the smoking-related higher healthcare costs for the employee pool, thereby effectively
eliminating the externality. But then, you find that the company’s 100%-employer-funded (defined benefit) pension pays the same monthly retirement
payments irrespective of smoker status. Returning to the module’s terminology, you might reason that non-smokers’ liberties to refrain from smoking, thereby
living an average of another ten years, pollutes the pension pool’s ability to pay higher monthly payments to those, including, but not limited to smokers, with
shorted expected lives. A consultant has recommended that you respond to this obvious disparity by directing the company to renegotiate with the
healthcare policy to arrange coverage having the same premium for smokers and non-smokers alike. What is your position on such a recommendation? Are
these externality/pollution arguments relevant? Is the proposed solution fair? If so, in what sense?
Current Event Nomination Prompt:
Please nominate another current event (not about smoking of any kind!) using a quick one or two sentence statement and/or web page link highlighting a
current event and its connection to the module’s topics of liberty and externalities. Note that the course’s library page Links to an external site. has
instructions for gaining free access to both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. Those and The Economist are frequently reliable resources for
quickly locating current event nominations – some reading will be involved, however!
Rubric
Position Statement & Current Event Nomination Rubric (1)
Position Statement & Current Event Nomination Rubric (1)
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomePosition articulation and supporting arguments
Does the position statement’s author clearly articulate a position on the subject along with the author’s rationale for advocating the position?
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRelevant interpretation and use of assigned readings and course experiences
In supporting the position, does the author incorporate the current module’s assigned readings and course experiences? Where appropriate, does the author
draw on connections to other module’s readings and experiences?
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDrawbacks, caveats and likely opposing arguments
Does the position statement’s author include a relevant discussion of the position’s drawbacks, caveats and likely opposing arguments in a way that
contributes to the author’s credibility regarding the advocated position?
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRelevance and clarity of the current event nomination
Does nomination succinctly connect the nominated current event to the current module’s topic, readings, and experiences?
6 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeGrammar and punctuation
Does the submitted position statement and/or current event nomination distract the reader due to multiple incidents of improper grammar and/or
punctuation?
1 pts
Total Points: 25