It's a smug post that doesn't really get to the heart of the issue. Yes, the government is inextricably involved in every aspect of our daily lives. So is the private sector. The devil, as always, is in the details. The government regulates our food, but it doesn't grow it or cook it. That's left to the private sector. Nobody would want the government to take over the duty of growing and cooking our food for us.
I see both sides of the argument as it relates to healthcare. Yes, in a civilized society, everyone should be granted access to healthcare if they are in need. You shouldn't need to provide bank account numbers and credit reports in order to receive medical treatment. But what healthcare plan could feasibly provide for 300,000,000 people? What evidence exists that government is capable of providing quality healthcare for that many people? And what if you want better treatment than is available to the general public? What if you, through your own success, can afford an extremely expensive and possibly experimental treatment that could potentially save your life? Why should you be limited because you're not the national mean?
At the same time, fully privatizing healthcare clearly doesn't work. It's not profitable to ensure someone in their 60s with a history of medical issues, but those people need health insurance more than anyone. It's also backward-minded to incentivize treatment and evasion of coverage.
It's a legitimate dilemma. There's no easy solution, and most sides of the argument are at least somewhat valid. It's not all stupidity and corruption.
|