Maureen O'Danu

Writer/Webmaster, www.amnottheonlyone.com
Independence, MO, United States

About Maureen

Bio

Maureen O'Danu is a Kansas City area writer, blogger, and clinical social worker who focuses on making life better at home, at work, and in the larger world through fun,thoughtful conversations, sound advice, and political action. She writes as Maureen O'Danu to keep just a hint of separation between her writing life and her life in the local community.

Languages

English

Areas of Expertise

Social Work, Mental Health and Addictions, History , zombies

An idea worth spreading

We need to tie maximum corporate compensation to minimum corporate compensation. In addition to minimum wage, the most a CEO or highly compensated person in a corporation can make is no more than 50X the least well compensated employee. This includes benefits. As part of this push, employers should be required to cover health care for all employees (until we get one payer healthcare) vs. only full time employees, reducing the incentive to drop employees to part time to avoid compensation costs.

I'm passionate about

feminism, social justice, civil rights, local and global environment, good real food,

Talk to me about

I am always looking for interesting ideas to explore in an essay and related open ended questions on my website. I am open to considering almost any topic.

People don't know I'm good at

if I told you they'd know ;-)

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

Noface
Maureen O'Danu
Posted about 2 years ago
By partially privatizing social security, would we be able to end the issues currently involved with it?
Social security is an insurance program, not an investment program. It is designed to be very low risk, and therefore it will never have as high returns as a market based retirement solution. On the other hand, it will not be wiped out every time there is a stock market crash, either. The issues with the sustainability of Social Security are overblown by self interested investors who have skin in the game of overhaul, whereas simple adjustments of how much is collected and from whom would keep the program solvent throughout the baby boom bubble and beyond.
Noface
Maureen O'Danu
Posted about 2 years ago
Should we force democracy?
Perhaps a better question is "can we", rather than should we (and also, who is "we")? Democracies require some fundamentals in a society that are often not in evidence, such as universal understanding and a basic understanding of and support for the democratic process. With the advent of easily accessible internet via phones and tablets, less and less corners of the world will be isolated from the vast array of data on the internet, and thus more and more places will build their own democracies. The Arab Spring, despite its flaws, is an example of this effect. Forced democracy seems to be an oxymoron to me.
Noface
Maureen O'Danu
Posted about 2 years ago
Social Equality? So share the expenses of the wealthy, too.
How are you defining risk in this context? Poor people die because of economic risk. They miss out on huge opportunities to better themselves because they are unable to garner the financial resources to match the intellectual or performance resources that offered the opportunity. To be clear, are you equating the financial risk of loss of belongings and/or status among the wealthy to loss of life and safety among the poor as a superior risk? Does it not therefore follow that you value the trade units of human interaction over human life?