This article has nothing to do with Alan Thicke or Kirk Cameron, nor does it have anything to do with growth spurts in pre-adolescent children. It has to do with something that is hotly debated by two sides who passionately believe they are right and the other side is wrong. I make no judgments about who the good guys and the bad guys are. Hopefully you won’t either.
Universal healthcare in the US has been the baby of the Clintons in the 90s and the ugly stepchild of the Obama administration. Those who are in favor are strongly in favor, while those who oppose believe it is something that stands contrary to the American way. There is no question that universal healthcare would benefit a large number of people, as both unemployment and poverty levels are rising. However, such a system would put a great burden on John Q. Taxpayer. I won’t quote costs here; I think “a lot” sums it up well enough. Opponents to the plan quite simply don’t want to take responsibility for people who can’t afford health coverage. Proponents say that it is something that has to happen at any cost, as not having UH costs lives and puts people deeper in debt. Not only that, bills that don’t get paid cost healthcare providers dearly.
Most of us know that much, perhaps most of the great nations of the planet Earth have UH. Most of us know that it is very expensive. The benefits are obvious: all citizens get medical care (the quality varies) and the providers get paid. American opponents say that implementation of UH in our country is another step toward communism. This is not far from the truth. In communist states, all resources, and costs for these resources, are divided up among the entire population; this is why no one really owned anything in the former Soviet countries. If you are helping to pay for x rays for an injured person 1000 miles away from you, then you are involved in a process that is at least partially communist in nature.
The American way is based on the idea that the individual has every opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so long as one supports and obeys the Constitution. Of course, not supporting and obeying the Constitution is not automatic disqualifier either, and that is one the great things about our country. The American Dream is predicated on the opportunity to accumulate personal wealth. The American Dream does not put limits on how much wealth one might accumulate, nor does it promote gaining wealth without any effort. (There are no guarantees either way.) The American Dream does not promote taking care of your neighbors. That is something we have the choice or doing, or not. The price of the American Dream is that we look out for ourselves, not each other. It’s not for me to judge whether or not it is right. We either live this way or we don’t, and there is no in between. If we live by the American way then we see how far we get in the world, and see how far we can advance our offspring as well. There is no room for looking out for our neighbors. The alternative is for all of us to look out for our neighbors and forsake ourselves. This requires great sacrifice, a kind of sacrifice most people (even UH supporters) wouldn’t be willing to make. As I said before, there is no middle ground.
Or is there? The UH battle is nearly as polarized as the abortion debate, and parties on both sides seem to assume there is no compromise. Okay, let’s come out and ask the question: can we achieve the American Dream while also helping out our neighbors? Putting it another way: can we implement a successful universal healthcare program that we can all stand behind? Does the answer necessarily have to be no?
My response: not right now. The USA is still a relatively young nation. There are those who say we are past our prime. I say we have not yet hit our prime. Remember the Roman Empire? How about the British Empire? They were the foremothers of our country, which has been a great world leader, and which has declined in that category. Like other great world powers, the USA still is in a position of growing and maturing. I hope that as each generation goes by, shows of power on opposite sides of arguments become less relevant, and the ability to compromise becomes more relevant. In short, while some are ready for UH, too many people are opposed, and maybe in time that will change when both sides are more willing to exchange bargaining chips.
In the meantime, we are stuck with a messy fight, and there are people without health coverage. We aren’t at our best, but are not at our worst either. We are going through growing pains.
No comments:
Post a Comment