Often (if not always), fear or attack is the reaction of not completely understanding something. So too it is, I believe, in the debate over healthcare in the United States. Opponents to public system (the majority of whom reside within the political party with which I am registered) speak to it as it is pure socialism and goes against the grain of what puts the U.S. out and apart from the the rest of the world. Our current healtcare system make us stand alone already – and not in a flattering way.
Also, has not a social option to education (that would be all public schools) been around in this country for a while. Is that socialism creeping in? Of course not. It is not without its quirks – nothing is perfect, but we believe in an educated society, one in which we all contribute to and appreciate the social and civil benefits. Why then do we resist a platform that promotes a healthy society? Left alone in the private sector, profitability will determine who lives and who dies. Would we accept a society void of public education where profitability determined who was to be schooled and who was not? I would think not.
Sunday’s Philadelphia Inquirer had an opinion piece that made me ponder the inclusion of parts of a system that appears socialist into a capitalistic society. (http://bit.ly/2kdAmh) I am a capitalist at heart and have full faith in the markets (sans expensive safety nets that prevent us from ever realizing self correcting markets operating at their best – but that’s another discussion). Still I can’t help but wonder why components or variations of this could not peacefully exist in a capitalistic society.
Why are real life or death decisions made with an eye on profitability? Human life is too often measured in dollars and that seems shortsighted (and immoral) to me. I am somewhere between Immanuel Kant and Utilitarianism. And the moral way can, in the long run, also be best for the greatest numbers.