Friday, February 28, 2014

Left, Right, Center



For Ronald Reagan, most questions were simple, and there was a clear answer.  Likely, he was significantly in the grip of dementia even during his first term, and for many demented patients there is often a wonderful clarity; the world and it's contradictions becomes simple, and clear. For Mr. Reagan, the answer to all problems of poverty and lives lived and wasted struggling with economic deprivation was simple: The free market solves all problems. Should we bring the resources of the government to bear on the problem of health care? Let the market bring its ruthless efficiency to the health care system and provide the best, most innovative solutions to the lack of health care for the poor, the unaffordability of basic care for the struggling middle class, but do not allow the government to dictate solutions in health care because the scariest ten words in the English language are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."  That was a very catchy line.  It implied Mr. Reagan had confidence in his audience to see the joke.  It became the anthem for the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh and the far right. It had clarity.

The problem was, it was the essence of facile. It seemed so simple, it had to be wrong. And it was.

Free markets, the profit motive work are potent forces, but where in America is there a really free market?  Certainly not in health care. 

What Mr. Reagan's supporters mean by "free market" is allowing rich and powerful corporations who got to be rich and powerful with government help, like the railroads, the oil companies, the drug companies, to be allowed, by protection of law, to crush all real threats to their supremacy, once they had achieved a position of advantage.

On the other hand, Karl Marx's idea of government as the ultimate planner and force of justice has no clear model of success. The collapse of the Soviet Union was predicted by that brilliant examination of its practical weaknesses in Orwell's Animal Farm. Communists, socialists never successfully answered Orwell's argument.  

In fact, socialized medicine in England, Germany and France has worked much better than the American patchwork quilt of medical care. Obamacare, has, for all we know, improved healthcare for large numbers of people, but there is little in the free, competitive media to document this. 

There are certain public endeavors which simply are not amenable to the profit motive. Health care is certainly the most obvious example, but national defense, space exploration, water management, power distribution and infrastructure, like bridges, roads and air traffic control are areas where the profit motive may simply be antithetical to the business at hand: The public good in these instances is simply not served by the drive toward profit.

The problem is, nobody has yet come up with a catchy little line for the failure of the profit motive. 

The closest thing is Upton Sinclair's line, "It is difficult to make a man understand something, if his salary depends on his not understanding it."




2 comments:

  1. Mad Dog,
    It is frustrating that so many in the public are willing to turn a blind eye to the lethal combination of the profit motive and healthcare-the best interest of the patient is never going to trump the healthcare industry's need and desire for a hefty and always increasing profit. Bravo to the GOP for their continued success at keeping the public snowed, they do have us beat when it comes to messaging...As for Obamacare, surely there are examples of people out there who have benefited from the program, but how many of them are here in NH is a good question. The two members of my family that could really use insurance relief haven't found any with Obamacare. This is mainly due to NH's version of it and our "exchange" consisting of only one very limited and limiting plan. In order to now keep their previous plan it is significantly more expensive for less coverage, and trying to gather information on the changes via the new "help line" is an effort in futility. One does eventually get to talk with a real person, but their knowledge of NH policy is so limited, how much better they are than a recording is debatable. This isn't to say it's the President's fault-he wasn't the one saddling the bill with all these limitations-but it is more than a little disappointing. I agree taking the profit motive out of the equation is the only real answer, but how many years until we see that happen? No time soon so long as the Right continues to successfully send home the message that such a change means "look out the Commies are coming"....
    Maud

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maud,

    You are right about the problem being specific to New Hampshire. My son, in New York, was rebuffed repeatedly trying to buy health insurance, but in the end he had fifteen insurance companies to choose among and he got a policy for $75 less a month than he had been paying and it covered everything from dental to prescriptions. He was thrilled. But in NH, you have one choice, Blue Cross Anthem. How that came to pass is beyond me. Apparently insurance companies do not think there is enough money to be made here in the Granite state, so, of course, given the law as it is written, there is no public option to step in where the profit motive fails.

    Mad Dog

    ReplyDelete