The occupation of Iraq continues, as the tragic death toll on all sides continue to mount. The president believes the best way to remain a beacon of freedom is to torture others, read everyone's mail and listen in on everyone's phone calls. Tensions continue with Iran while Bush "recommits" to Mideast peace (and we should all know what that means -although the term 'Mideast peace" --well-Bush could be talking about Virginia, which on a U.S. map appears to be roughly in the middle of the east). And despite Mr. Bush's repeated assurance, "we fight them there so we don't fight them here", the latest intelligence suggests that we have created a new generation of radicals and the terrorist threat has grown. With all of the madness around us (and the potential for new madness), it is fairly easy to be distracted from some of the basic issues such as education, opportunity, poverty, security (real security, not "taking infant formula away from new mothers at the airport-type security)and healthcare.
(most of the "ABC's of Corpocracy" series is available here)
Many Americans have health insurance and if you have it, you are probably less inclined to notice the urgency of those that do not. If you do have it through an employer, you've probably noticed that you are paying more for less coverage. In the Declaration of Independence the founders felt that the concept of "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" were rather important. If we or someone we love and care for are sick, and require medical care, there is a pretty impressive array of medical science that can engage and help. To unleash this capability requires a significant amount of financial resources. For those of us that are fortunate, a large percentage is covered by medical insurance, however for those that do not have coverage, the consequences are devastating. If the individual is unable to pay for their care or the care of a loved one, the bill for such services will pass to society. One would presumably think it would be enough to make a conservative angry.
I can understand that the cost of research and care is built into the costs we pay for healthcare, and if I must pay more, I am very pleased if the research we fund leads to cures for AIDS, Cancer, Parkinsons' and other horrific disease that cause suffering in America and beyond. When higher costs are allocated to medical and drug research, good wages and benefits for healthcare workers and facilities so people don't have to go 100 miles away for essential treatment and care, I can accept that. What I find disturbing is running the healthcare system in a for profit manner, suddenly providing a high-standard of care for patients is dictated by CPA's and Wall Street Analysts. And healthcare CEO's start living in several beautiful homes with compensation packages that are embarrassing to all but themselves. Now, some of my friends are Wall Street Analysts, and I enjoy their company and they would probably admit that between adding a 1/16 tick to the underlying price of a stock versus getting grandma that pacemaker she needs, grandma is going to lose.
As a substantial part of our contribution to business productivity and the economy requires us to be reasonably healthy, it is logical that business should provide coverage (as a way of improving profit). Nevertheless, as unemployment rolls ebb and flow, and jobs move to other parts of the world to reduce business costs, business participation in a societal system of ensuring that people have access to healthcare is and will always be incomplete.
While I admire local governments that have recently passed legislation to require major employers to provide health coverage for its workers (anything which leads to greater coverage is helpful), the real solution rests in the understanding that not all products and services are best served by the profit motive, and healthcare is a prime example.
The arguments about a socialized system of healthcare causing a significant drop of quality are interesting, yet are generally promoted by businesses that have a large vested stake in profit, or think tanks that are funded by businesses with a vested interest in healthcare and drug profits. There are x number of citizens and y number of doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals. Changing the way people get access to healthcare will not diminish quality of care.
Beyond the profit motive, we each have a personal responsibility to be proactive in managing our own health. People that smoke should contribute more for their healthcare costs. People that are overweight (and yes, despite my vegetarian and near vegan lifestyle I still manage to eat too much) or create additional risk should be assessed some sort of additional fee so society does not become overburdened by the risks we choose and should personally assume.
So perhaps we should pay into a single system (single payor) that administers the plan, and allows everyone fundamental access to quality proactive and reactive healthcare (as opposed to the generally reactive system we have now).
In 2003 there were 41.6 million people in America under the age 65, without health insurance. Nearly 1 in every 10 children has no health insurance. A recent article in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Volume 31, Issue 4 (October 2006) published by Elsevier raises some alarm about the rapid increase in severe poverty in the U.S. since the year 2000. The researchers noted that the number of Americans living in severe poverty increased by 3.6 million people between the years 2000 - 2004. See http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/... for more about the research. Despite the discouraging news, take heart all those that have welcomed the Bush tax cuts and so-called economic stimulus. There is growth in some segments of the economy. The news about more people falling into severe poverty in the U.S. is starkly contrasted by the story, "Luxury yacht boom continues as new money floods in" recently appearing in Yahoo! News --see http://news.yahoo.com/.... I guess that some of the poor in America haven't been trickle'd on yet.
The implications are clear --there will be more pressure on public health systems, and the burden will disproportionately fall upon the middle class, poor and our nations' children. Still proud to be an American? I look forward to being proud when no child is turned away from the standard of healthcare they require in order to pursue life, liberty and happiness. No parent should consider whether to take their child for necessary medical care at the risk of not having being able to afford food or shelter. It is an outrage and we must awaken from our TV induced stupor. Oh wait, Desperate Housewives is on tonight. I guess I'm done, gotta go.
Just a few thoughts from my over-caffeinated alphabetic mind.
About the Author: Mr. Polisner founded alonovo.com in March of 2005. He has been working in most aspects of Information Technology since 1981 and was an early commercial adopter of the UNIX operating system. Prior to founding alonovo.com, George was a Director at Oracle Corporation. He is a frequent contributor to newspapers regarding political and economic policy and often appears as a guest on radio programs. In fact, when it comes to alonovo.com, it's pretty difficult to get him to stop talking. George is also available for speaking engagements.