The only part Thomas Szasz gets right in his WSJ essay, Universal Health Care Isn't Worth Our Freedom, is that we can all make better choices to improve our health. I vow to not eat a rare cheeseburger for lunch.
Mr. Szasz sets off with an unfortunate analogy between a car and the human body. He writes, “People who seek the services of auto mechanics want car repair, not "auto care." Similarly, most people who seek the services of medical doctors want body repair, not "health care."”
Okay fine, he has a problem with the rhetorical devices that are framing this debate but he continues,
“We own our cars, are responsible for the cost of maintaining them, and decide what needs fixing based partly on balancing the seriousness of the problem against the expense of repairing it. Our health-care system rests on the principle that, although we own our bodies, the community or state ought to be responsible for paying the cost of repairing them.”
This is where Mr. Szasz has become a ghoul. The decisions to get a new carburetor and necessary medical attention are not analogous in the current context of the rising cost of health care or most other contexts. I have not read the stories of the tens of thousands of people that have landed in bankruptcy because the engine rebuild for their 1984 Buick Regal (my first car) cost too much. All too often, unforeseen medical problems have not only landed people in bankruptcy they crash.
I was wrong, Mr. Szasz was also correct that the “rich and educated people not only receive better goods and services in all areas of life than do poor and uneducated people, they also tend to take better care of themselves and their possessions, which in turn leads to better health.” Any education of the, “poor and uneducated people” in the area of healthy choices is an excellent idea. Unfortunately, in the time that elapses in the "national health class", people will continue to become bankrupt. Perhaps we can teach the wretched and also let them see a doctor.
The rich always have a great percentage of their income or wealth available to purchase goods and service and they still will if poor people can see doctor. The rich will see any doctor they want because they can afford it.
Mr. Szasz has a problem with the current debate. The options are not going to be perfect but we need to do more than educate.
Perhaps while you donate your old car to Habitat for Humanity they can take your sick bankrupt aunt as well. Here is the link to donate your car. Sphere: Related Content
2 comments:
I quote Mr. Szasz: “rich and educated people not only receive better goods and services in all areas of life than do poor and uneducated people, they also tend to take better care of themselves and their possessions, which in turn leads to better health.” Well, that's a great argument! Actually, tautological reasoning doesn't count when your trying to be persuasive. Rich = superior services = responsibility = good health!
I'm glad you're treating the Szasz article with the kind of disgust it deserves.
The arguments he makes remind me a lot of the Reagan argument that people are homeless because they choose to be homeless.
I also wrote a Progressive response to it here, if you're interested.
Post a Comment