The Implications of SICKO

Written by: Herb Best on Jul 7, 2007 5:55 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Hanover Township Democrats & Independents (HanDI)

Rick Stabile has an excellent critique of the movie SICKO.  I agreed with much of what he wrote, but I do have a comment about the implications that a single-provider health insurance (National Health Insuranve) may not be possible here.

First, let me indicate some of my personal biases.  I am a former teacher of History and a continuing student of history.  I disliked reading the history of the United States in the late nineteenth century.  The concentration was on the Robber Barons and Captains of Industry.  Politicians and statesmen got short shrift.  

Only later did I mature enough in my thinking to realize how significant to American history were these pirates of industry.  Oh sure, there is the argument that economic development needs to concentrate enough wealth to make that development possible and there is a bias against socialism and big government, preferring instead big business.  And, I began to be fascinated by the Social Gospel that melded nicely with my developing Christian belief structure.  So, I guess that HanDI is as close as I can get to Christian Socialism (which by the way, is one of the major parties in many European countries).

All this is by way of introducing my own belief in Universal Health Care in the guise of an expansion of Medicare to all Americans.  

Can we afford it?  Of course we can.  Take all the excessive profits from pharmaceutical companies and the health care industry and excessive tax breaks to the wealthy and that immoral, illegal, un-American Iraqi war and occupation, and voila!!  We have money for Universal Health Care, Child Care, Living Wage for all Americans, real No Child Left Behind Education, and Urban Development, etc.  

Does this mean that we will have fewer billionaires to dispense noblesse oblige charity?  Yes.... but why should that be a problem for the bottom 99% of Americans?  

Will it mean higher taxes?  Yes, but look at the benefits received for all Americans.  We give a little to get a lot.  

Better education means fewer criminals and more productive citizens.  The end of medical bankruptcy means better and healthier Americans.  

Loss of choice?  What choice do 40 million plus Americans have?  And, who really chooses your current health insurance after the top executives choose your menu?

Rick Stabile has an excellent critique of the movie SICKO.  I agreed with much of what he wrote, but I do have a comment about the implications that a single-provider health insurance (National Health Insuranve) may not be possible here.

First, let me indicate some of my personal biases.  

I am a former teacher of History and a continuing student of history.  I disliked reading the history of the United States in the late nineteenth century.  The concentration was on the Robber Barons and Captains of Industry.  Politicians and statesmen got short shrift.  

Only later did I mature enough in my thinking to realize how significant to American history were these pirates of industry.  Oh sure, there is the argument that economic development needs to concentrate enough wealth to make that development possible and there is a bias against socialism and big government, preferring instead big business.  And, I began to be fascinated by the Social Gospel that melded nicely with my developing Christian belief structure.

So, I guess that HanDI is as close as I can get to Christian Socialism (which by the way, is one of the major parties in many European countries).

All this is by way of introducing my own belief in Universal Health Care in the guise of an expansion of Medicare to all Americans.  

Can we afford it?  Of course we can.  Take all the excessive profits from pharmaceutical companies and the health care industry and excessive tax breaks to the wealthy and that immoral, illegal, un-American Iraqi war and occupation, and voila!!  We have money for Universal Health Care, Child Care, Living Wage for all Americans, real No Child Left Behind Education, and Urban Development, etc.  

Does this mean that we will have fewer billionaires to dispense noblesse oblige charity?  Yes.... but why should that be a problem for the bottom 99% of Americans?  

Will it mean higher taxes?  Yes, but look at the benefits received for all Americans.  We give a little to get a lot.  

Better education means fewer criminals and more productive citizens.  The end of medical bankruptcy means better and healthier Americans.  

Loss of choice?  What choice do 40 million plus Americans have?  And, who really chooses your current health insurance after the top executives choose your menu?

Peace and Justice, Herb

Tags: