Today in class Leah wrote down some of her thoughts about health care (I can't fault her for not paying attention to class...I doodle and write short stories). Anyway, before she went to bed she read her 3-pages of thoughts. In a nutshell, Leah supports government funded health care for children (until age 17). This makes sense, to me at least, because the way I see it the only people without much choice (at all) are children.
Anyway, despite agreeing with her, I argued against this plan. I said that I thought Pediatrics in general would go down in quality. Medical students would opt to go into "adult" medicine to make more money (after all the government isn't going to pay top dollar for this health care for children). Leah countered this by saying she'd give money to people who agreed to practice medicine on children (working through the government programs). I countered by asked where all this money would come
from--taxes of course. And why not? People pay for things (via taxes) that they don't use. For example, single/childless people pay for public schools. But it's all for the greater good. Schools educate people so they can gets jobs (instead of becoming criminals). But look at public schools (actually, don't...they're a mess). Imagine government run health care. I shudder.
Leah's big idea is that by having early health care available, people will grow up healthier--thus saving everyone money (fewer sick, uninsured people will lower costs for everyone). I think this is a valid point--but I don't think that it will create as big effect as she thinks. I think many people will turn 18 and become uninsured. All the good work done up till that point will be for naught (sort of). Also, parents who have to pay for medical care are less likely to clog the system with kids who are suffering from minor things (like colds, which can't be treated). I can see some people abusing free health care in this way. Every little cut or scrape will need attention. I'm not sure if a stuffy nose is what Leah had in mind (but some people will do this). Should I pay for every kid's scratchy throat?
But the biggest problem I have is, of course, the problem of dependency. I don't like the idea of people growing up so dependent on the government. Government is many things, but a protector of every person it is not. At it's best Government should help those who the most helpless, and those who non-government charities can't help. I'm not sure I am comfortable with having elected officials decide what medical procedures are "necessary" and which ones aren't. I'm not sure if Government should decide if my child in a coma should live. When Government starts footing the bill, it starts to get "opinions" on things it has no business thinking about. Government will end up essentially playing God. Only got a 35% chance of surviving your Cancer? Sorry, Trent Lott (who is not a doctor) and the rest of Congress decided you have to have a 36% chance of survival before we pay for your treatment. It'll happen--when more and more people start putting a strain on the system. As more and more people choose to not pay for their children's health care (sure, this plan might start as optional...but people will say "I'm paying for it anyway with my taxes!!! Why not use it?"). Pretty soon Government is telling you how many kids each couple is allowed to have ("We only cover two children, so you have to pay for your third...") for reasons of money and nothing else. Meanwhile "Private" health care will cost and arm and a leg. People will be forced by the market into Governments "loving" embrace.
And then there is the "Slippery Slope." Why only take care of kids? What about Seniors? Shouldn't they...after working so hard for so long, get 100% health care? What about nursing care? A friend of mine just put his granddad in a nursing home--for $5,000 a month!!! More taxes? Will that solve is? Maybe we should just let our old people die? (it is cheaper).
Also, I think clothing should be a "natural right" (to quote the Socialists) so why not give out free clothes. What about food? We could keep health care costs down if we provided citizens with pre-packaged meals (of healthy food, grown by Government farmers). Everyone should have a home, let's give everyone a Government home, too. Electricity is vital to modern living, some people can't live without it to power heating/AC units. Should everyone be guaranteed to get these things? Oh, only the bottom of the barrel, dirt poor...well who is that? What about the people right above them (economically)?
The fact is, unless the Government gives us everything--someone will always be left out in the "cold." As a society we must collectively try to reach out, but not through Government. Instead, churches and other non-profit organizations of charity should act as the safety net. Government's place is to provide us with peace and the freedom to pursue happiness. Government doesn't owe us anything, and we shouldn't give so much of our money to Government. I think there are lots of people who could afford health care if they made other lifestyle choices. Why should MORE of my paycheck vanish?
In short--I'm worried that people are going without proper health care. At the same time, I'm worried about certain politicians laying the foundation of a "Welfare State," where people are basically reduced to serfdom in service to the State. Where people let Government do terrible things simply because they are afraid to speak out and risk losing important life essentials. Essentials which, in a free market, are more affordable to a majority than they would be if regulated by Government. I don't know what the answer is. This is complex. I'm afraid the only human solution is to lay the foundation of a Welfare State.
I'll end with this thought. Do you really want the people who: Can't find Bin Laden, win a war in the Middle East (or tell us the truth about why there even is a war), admit that there is Global Warming, run decent schools, etc...do you want that group of people running your health care (or the care of your children?). I don't. I don't trust elected officials or bureaucracy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't know much about government, politics, etc. All I can tell you from first-hand experience is that something has to be done to help poor people (i.e. me) get health insurance. Before asshole Matt Blunt came into office, I was able to receive Medicaid because I'm a single mom who can't work more than part-time (with school and all). Since most part-time jobs don't provide health insurance, I'm pretty much screwed. I haven't had insurance of any kind for the past two years, and it really worries me. Not simply because something "could" happen, but I can't even get yearly check-ups, and when I'm sick to the point of needing real medicine or at least a doctor's opinion, the state of Missouri has left me out in the cold. I mean, think about all the people with early stages of cancer...If they had insurance, maybe they'd see a doctor, and quite possibly, save their life before it was too late. This country is totally fucked up.
Anyway, my party is on October 13th- for sure. It's a Saturday. I'll see you there! Remind Paul for me in case I forget. :)
I agree that there needs to be a safety net for people like you (and people that are worse off). However, I'm worried that people like me--who, though poor could afford insurance (I have no kids) would just choose to rely on the government rather than be responsible. I could see myself not being responsible, especially when I considered the fact that through taxes I'd be paying for it.
I could see many people abusing government health care in such a manner ("I may as well use it...I'm paying for it"). I don't think everyone in this country needs the government's help with health care. I know many people who can afford it.
But you are right, there are many people who are going to die early because they don't see doctors on a regular basis.
Post a Comment