It's More Important How? than What?

Nicholas Kristof says the biggest global opportunity, comparable to ending slavery or totalitarianism, is advancing women's roles in the emerging world. Others worry about climate change, financial collapses, religious extremists or the bomb.

But, perhaps the proper question to consider first is not the what. Maybe, it is the how.

How are the needs of individuals dealt with in an age when corporations (and governments and the ultra-rich) have the money, the power and the votes?

Ayn Rand and the Cato Institute would abolish government, effectively giving all of the power to the wealthy who can move to private utopias and ignore the biggest issues.

The Republican party is more worried about the welfare of corporations than the welfare of voters.

The Democratic party in its quest to "solve" problems can forget that appetites are insatiable and that a "free market" can be reasonably efficient.

Here are some proper roles of government (the how):

Regulate away the ability of economic giants to create "externalities" such as depressions caused by high risk investing.

Limit the bigness of corporations and thus limit their power to extort governments. (Any corporation with more than one billion dollars in sales should be taxed heavily enough that it considers splitting itself into smaller, less politically powerful companies.)

Tax "externalities" such as the pollution and carbon dioxide created by a large business. (Cap and trade is a reasonable way to limit carbon dioxide. If corporate use of sweeteners causes obesity, which shortens lifespans, then tax Coca Cola's use of high fructose corn syrup.)

Tax "externalities" that an individual creates. (Gas taxes should be much higher. Energy taxes should be higher and progressive.)

Create roads and public transportation with the vision of continued economic growth. (If the top 10% of income earners are not riding public transportation, then the public transportation is not designed correctly.)

Engage globally. Being the one remaining military "superpower" creates the obligation to be engaged and multilateral. (The United Nations must be regarded seriously as it is the body best representing the globe.)

If we get the how correctly, then we can move on to some more important "what" issues:

Ensure some basic standard of living. (If people live in places less nice than a Motel 6, then offer them a Motel 6.)

Make excellent education available to all.

Health care is hard. Reducing infant mortality in the United States should be a top goal. Did you notice that I did not solve it? When Barack Obama pointed out that 80% of health insurance in the state of Alabama is controlled by one company, he nailed the essence of the problems with the current system.

And, how to improve the plight of women in third world countries? You may have to do that one on your own, though Nicholas Kristof can provide ideas.

That Barack Obama is essentially getting the how right is more impressive to me than the Nobel Prize. Or, to be more accurate, not getting it terribly, terribly wrong is impressive to me in this era.