[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement:
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 13:25:24 10/05/09 Mon
Author: DizzyDeb
Subject: I REALLY don't want to stir things up again....
In fact, I'd love to have a civil conversation about the following article, which I think is excellent.
From the conservatives here, what exactly is it that makes you mistrust health care reform so much?
By ROGER COHEN
Published: October 4, 2009
NEW YORK — Back from another trip to Europe, this time Germany, where the same dismay as in France prevails over the U.S. health care debate. Europeans don’t get why Americans don’t agree that universal health coverage is a fundamental contract to which the citizens of any developed society have a right.
I don’t get it either. Or rather I do, but I don’t think the debate is about health. There can be no doubt that U.S. health care is expensive and wasteful. Tens of millions of people are uninsured by a system that devours a far bigger slice of national output — and that’s the sum of all Americans’ collective energies — than in any other wealthy society.
People die of worry, too. Emergency rooms were not created to be primary care providers.
Whatever may be right, something is rotten in American medicine. It should be fixed. But fixing it requires the acknowledgment that, when it comes to health, we’re all in this together. Pooling the risk between everybody is the most efficient way to forge a healthier society.
Europeans have no problem with this moral commitment. But Americans hear “pooled risk” and think, “Hey, somebody’s freeloading on my hard work.”
A reader, John Dowd, sent me this comment: “In Europe generally the populace in the various countries feels enough sense of social connectedness to enforce a social contract that benefits all, albeit at a fairly high cost. In America it is not like that. There is endless worry that one’s neighbor may be getting more than his or her “fair” share.”
Post-heroic European societies, having paid in blood for violent political movements born of inequality and class struggle, see greater risk in unfettered individualism than in social solidarity. Americans, born in revolt against Europe and so ever defining themselves against the old Continent’s models, mythologize their rugged (always rugged) individualism as the bulwark against initiative-sapping entitlements. We’re not talking about health here. We’re talking about national narratives and mythologies — as well as money. These are things not much susceptible to logic. But in matters of life and death, mythology must cede to reality, profit to wellbeing.
I can see the conservative argument that welfare undermines the work ethic and dampens moral fiber. Provide sufficient unemployment benefits and people will opt to chill rather than labor. But it’s preposterous to extend this argument to health care. Guaranteeing health coverage doesn’t incentivize anybody to get meningitis.
Yet that’s what Republicans’ cry of “socialized medicine” — American politics at its most debased — is all about. It implies that government-provided health care somehow saps Americans’ freedom-loving initiative. Some Democrats — prodded by drug and insurance companies with the cash to win favors — buy that argument, too.
I’m grateful to the wise Andrew Sullivan of The Atlantic for pointing out that Friedrich Hayek, whose suspicion of the state was visceral, had this to say in “The Road to Serfdom:”
“Where, as in the case of sickness and accident, neither the desire to avoid such calamities nor the efforts to overcome their consequences are as a rule weakened by the provision of assistance — where, in short, we deal with genuinely insurable risks — the case for the state’s helping to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance is very strong.”
That’s why, when it comes to health, every developed society but the United States has such a “comprehensive system,” almost always with state involvement. However, pooled risk does not necessarily imply a public option. It can be achieved through mandated private-insurer coverage coupled with subsidies. That, for example, is the Swiss way — and where Congress seems headed.
But it’s nonprofit insurers who provide the coverage in Switzerland because health insurance is viewed as social insurance — as it is throughout Europe — rather than a means to make money. One fundamental reason a public option — yes, “option,” not single-payer monopoly — is needed in the United States is to jump-start the idea that basic health care is a moral obligation rather than a financial opportunity.
Another is to provide competition to private insurers and so force waste, excess and cozy arrangements out of the American system. Behind all the socialized medicine babble lurks a hard-headed calculation about money — all the profits skimmed from that waste and the big doctors’ salaries that go with it.
It’s not over yet for the public option. President Barack Obama should still push it with a clear moral stand.
He’s been too deferential. The best bit of his speech to Congress on health care was the last — and even there he left the most powerful words to the late Edward Kennedy: “What we face is above all a moral issue; at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.”
Obama then said he’d been pondering American character “quite a bit” and did some “self-reliance” versus government intervention musing.
He should have been clearer and punchier. A public commitment to universal coverage is not character-sapping but character-affirming. Medicare did not make America less American. Individualism is more “rugged” when housed in a healthy body.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Replies:
[>
I'm a conservative... -- gg, 13:45:57 10/05/09 Mon [1]
what makes "you" think "I" mistrust health care reform? Here we go with sweeping generalizations! Snap out of it!!! Generalizations aren't worth my time. Specifics please...oh never mind. Good bye.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: I'm a conservative... -- niki, 12:10:34 10/06/09 Tue [1]
I didn't see anywhere that DizzyDeb stated that *ALL* conservatives mistrust healthcare reform.
If you are fine with healthcare reform and the article then clearly the question wasn't directed toward you. But thanks for playing.
I too would like to know what it is that concerns people so much about healthcare reform. My brother says it just costs too much. I can see that, but at the same time I think it is hard to build up the economy and get people to spend money when they know that any accident or illness may push them right into bankruptcy.
I can understand the objection to welfare and "sharing the wealth" I just don't see how it fits into healthcare. Illness is not fair and people aren't going to use more of the healthcare pool because they enjoy being ill. Clearly it is cheaper to have regular healthcare then to be forced to use the ER?
When we see a (veterinary) patient for a 2nd opinion, the first thing we do is try to obtain the records from the previous vet so we are not repeating the same tests, yet I just switched doctors and no attempt is even made to get my old records (not that is much there, but they don't know that). Why are we rerunning baseline values instead of sharing them?
Are we really saying that if you cannot afford healthcare, you just shouldn't get any? Really?
[ Edit | View ]
[>
You're right, gg -- DizzyDeb, 13:48:20 10/05/09 Mon [1]
I guess a civil conversation can't be held. Thanks for the "conversation".
[ Edit | View ]
[>
I find that I miss posting here -- Jeannine, 11:41:46 10/09/09 Fri [1]
guess I do "need this shit" after all. I will try to stay civil.
With respect, Niki, this is a direct quote from Deb's post:
"From the conservatives here, what exactly is it that makes you mistrust health care reform so much?"
to answer Deb's question, I mistrust health care reform under Democrats. The elected officials we have right now do not represent my values. I know there is nothing I can do at this point; they have a super majority. Not one republican vote is needed. There should be no problems passing whatever they want.
As for the article, this is another article by a liberal telling us what conservatives think. That is illogical. Makes much more sense to read articles by Conservatives about what Conservatives think, doesn't it? I would recommend starting with Charles Krauthammer. They don't come any more brilliant than him.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Thank you, Jeannine... -- gg, 14:01:51 10/09/09 Fri [1]
wording is important, especially on a political board. It's one of the main reasons I don't elaborate much on my thoughts. Glad to see you back and would like to see Muppy back as well. I'll drop in not so often. Later...
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
I agree that wording is important. -- Jenn, 15:33:08 10/09/09 Fri [1]
I also think that we can choose to respond calmly.
We can give our fellow RT family members the benefit of the doubt.
We can ask for clarification instead of making assumptions.
I didn't think DizzyDeb meant that all conservatives shared one single viewpoint. I can see how it might not have been worded well, but I'd rather give my fellow board member the benefit of the doubt.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Great Jenn! Let's hope all posters follow your example. -- Jeannine, 16:14:49 10/09/09 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: I agree that wording is important. -- gg, 16:29:03 10/09/09 Fri [1]
Unfortunately, I've read a lot worse here than my measly post, and really, no need to pontificate. I know you mean well, Jenn :-) Really, I do, you're a sweet person...the kind of person who has a rainbow around you with little birds chirping, butterflys fluttering excitedly about, and a baby deer smiling up at you. I sincerely mean that in the best way; there are few people in this world that exude that tranquility and sweetness, but you don't see them in D.C., though. Politics...well, is not all rosey posey.
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [> [>
I'm not talking politics. -- Jenn, 19:27:56 10/09/09 Fri [1]
I'm talking about this group of people on this board and how we get to make the choice as to how we react to one another.
I appreciate your comments on my sweetness, though please do not mistake that for naivety.
:o) J
[ Edit | View ]
[>
I've missed you, too, Jeannine. -- DizzyDeb, 12:31:48 10/09/09 Fri [1]
I did say "conservatives" because those here on the board seem to be the ones who object to health care reform. I stand corrected. I, instead ask what those opposed to health care reform are so afraid of. I would like to discuss what kinds of health reform everyone would be willing to accept. Frankly, it seems to me that the Democrats & Republicans are quite close in what they want. But there are even some Democrats that don't want the whole package being proposed right now.
I just don't understand why making sure everyone has some kind of health care is so offensive to some people. As I understand things, what is being proposed is not a takeover by the government. It's an offering of an option that people could afford.
I am one of the very lucky people in this country whose employer pays 100% of my health insurance. I, however, have to pay 100% of my husband's coverage because his employer offers none. That, plus taxes, takes 2/3 of my paycheck! We both take several prescriptions our doctors tell us we must have. Some months we have resorted to taking those prescriptions every other day to make them last. We are one of the couples who is one emergency away from losing our home. And, like I said, we're one of the lucky ones!
I'd just like to have a civil conversation without the sarcasm and name-calling. I know it can be done!
[ Edit | View ]
[>
I've missed you, too, Jeannine. -- DizzyDeb, 12:33:50 10/09/09 Fri [1]
I did say "conservatives" because those here on the board seem to be the ones who object to health care reform. I stand corrected. I, instead ask what those opposed to health care reform are so afraid of. I would like to discuss what kinds of health reform everyone would be willing to accept. Frankly, it seems to me that the Democrats & Republicans are quite close in what they want. But there are even some Democrats that don't want the whole package being proposed right now.
I just don't understand why making sure everyone has some kind of health care is so offensive to some people. As I understand things, what is being proposed is not a takeover by the government. It's an offering of an option that people could afford.
I am one of the very lucky people in this country whose employer pays 100% of my health insurance. I, however, have to pay 100% of my husband's coverage because his employer offers none. That, plus taxes, takes 2/3 of my paycheck! We both take several prescriptions our doctors tell us we must have. Some months we have resorted to taking those prescriptions every other day to make them last. We are one of the couples who is one emergency away from losing our home. And, like I said, we're one of the lucky ones!
I'd just like to have a civil conversation without the sarcasm and name-calling. I know it can be done!
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Have no idea why this posted twice. -- DizzyDeb, 12:36:28 10/09/09 Fri [1]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]
Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.
|
|
