There's been a lot of debate lately on private insurance vs socialized medicine. This is the wrong debate because both are different versions of bad when we need good.
Let's take an idealized, individualist, capitalist approach first. I work and save up (real) money. Something bad happens to me. I go to a doctor and ask how much it would cost to fix me. I then decide if I want to spend the money on this doctor's cure. I could not spend the money, leaving it to the people I love if I'm terminally ill, or just suffer with my ailment because I would suffer more from the loss of my money. It's my decision.
There are other options, though. I rarely write about interdependencies (read 7 Habits) because if you don't understand independence you'll never get interdependence right, imo. But it applies here. In addition to my own concern for my well-being, there may be others who have an interest in keeping me alive. My parents may want grand-children. My employer may want to keep a good employee. My wife may want to keep her husband, and so on. All of these people who have an interest in keeping me alive may choose to donate or loan the money needed for my care. It's their decision - it's their money. Imo, this is the most valuable insurance you can get: the love and respect of those around you, therefore, instead of paying high insurance costs, or higher taxes, I highly suggest you invest in time and rich experiences with your loved ones.
Now, contrast that last investment with the two options currently being debated. With private health insurance you're paying someone regularly who has an interest in discontinuing service when you need them the most. This isn't too bad, because you can choose to not pay for health insurance. But with socialized medicine, you can't opt-out: if you choose to spend money on your children rather than taxes you'll be prosecuted for tax evasion. You've lost your freedom to do as you choose with your money, and lost the ability to invest in a more effective form of health insurance: love.
Que Bono? Baby Boomers are rapidly loosing their worth in America's economy. They're becoming productively obsolete and an enormous health care liability. If they were to go directly to their children with the cost of their treatments, they would be greeted with more "no"s than when those same children were pried from the toy store at the mall thirty years ago - put Viagra on your Christmas wish list and maybe if you're a good senior citizen there will be a present in your stocking. Instead they're legislating their health care burden onto their children, making it illegal to refuse care for the hedonistic and over-privileged 60's generation.
Campaign for Liberty is running a petition to stop the legislation, please help.
No comments:
Post a Comment