I've written that statement in my notebook both times we've discussed health care in class, and it seems true. Health care is a right up a certain point, but a luxury anything past it. The question is where is that point? The Oregon Plan seemed to point out clearly where the point is. Just because they use a system like this, does not mean that it is just. The fact of the matter is, we can't keep everyone alive forever and there has to be a limit on what we can do. The only way to do this is to provide for the medical needs up to a certain point. History has shown that the rich live where the poor die (minus the discovery of penicillin); the rich can afford operations needed, extra organs, and preventative care; the poor cannot.
It seems that all of the debates about health care tend to lead to the same discussions. Either a socialist view of universal health care, or a plan such as this, where you are left to decide between saving a lot of lives or a small portion of lives. I think that if we want to maintain a capitalist society, we need to allow for certain aspects of it to be unfair. It takes away from the merits of capitalism to say that the government has to regulate the medical supply or pharmaceutical industries because they are overcharging. I think it was Dave who said that it is an unfair economic assessment because there is unlimited demand and it is not really affected by supply. Whereas I see this point, a good counter is the cost of research involved. Think about how many failed drugs are on the market, or how much research time has been wasted due to the fact that the drug you made ended up with the same patented formula as something else, thus making it moot. I think in order to solve the problem of regulation in this country, we need to decide on what values in an economic system we actually care about. To many, the ability for free trade does not matter, because they feel it does not directly affect them. Others think that a completely 'fair' system is best. But what it winds down to is whether we want complete equality, or a system that makes room for motivation to succeed, i.e. an unequal system.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My first response to this post would be that history has shown us a lot of things that seemed like they were fine, or even great, at the time, but we now recognize that they SO are not.
ReplyDeleteI somewhat agree with Axl when he repeats that you can't keep everyone alive forever. I do feel, however, that the current system, where insurance companies decide who gets surgeries and who doesn't, must be reality playing a joke on us. I absolutely think that decision regarding medical questions should be between doctors, patients, and their families.
I do know that there isn't an unlimited supply of money to perform every surgery that every person needs, and I understand almost every medical cost, with the exception of the exorbitant costs of prescription medications. I do think, though, that health care is a right, and that as a society we need to push that "point" where it's seen as a luxury as far back as possible if we're to remain ethical.
I am just wondering where the 'point' is that you speak of that healthcare becomes a luxury instead of a right. Because based on where this point is, I may either agree with you largely, or completely disagree. While I agree that the government cannot just keep everyone alive forever (actually no one can), I would argue that there are way more people that are not receiving basic health care in America now than can really even be calculated. Even of the insured, there are many with a deductible high enough that they can't afford to go in for basic check-ups and visits. And often when anything expensive comes up, people are kicked off of their healthcare for a variety of reasons.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'd be curious to hear more of your solutions, because I believe I got the impression in class that you were for no government intervention in healthcare, but here it sounds like you would be alright with it up to a certain point. It'd be interesting to hear more about where that point is.