I’m often asked by conservatives why they should pay for someone else’s health care.
It’s a valid question. I certainly am no believer in free lunch. Let me see if I can explain.
The most important issue to understand is, if you have health insurance, see a doctor, pay taxes, or work, you’re already paying for someone else’s health care.
If you pay property taxes, you’re paying for county health programs.
If you work, you’re paying income taxes, which go to any number of programs, including the VA, Medicare, Medi-caid, and so on.
If you see a doctor, you may be paying more so the doctor can afford to provide care to someone who can’t. Same goes for hospitals. Last I checked there aren’t money fairies who fly around balancing the books of health care providers who see indigent patients. Hospitals don’t have money trees where they just go collect a harvest every time a patient can’t pay.
If you have insurance, well that’s the Granddaddy of paying for someone else’s care. Most people use far less than they pay in. The problem is, we don’t know until it’s too late if we’ll suddenly need insurance, which is why most people prefer to have it, because you are effectively penalized if you become a heavy user, and aren’t covered.
The problem is, if people don’t have access to quality health care, then they don’t get the care they need until it’s a crisis. Purchasing during a crisis is never the best time to purchase. You don’t have the time or resources to adequately evaluate the options, and usually spend more than you would have otherwise. This is the crux of the problem with American health care, too much of the care delivered is in the most expensive setting, not the least. I don’t know about you, but if I’m going to be paying for someone else’s health care, I’d really rather pay less than we’re paying now, and get better quality to boot. I’d also like to save money by treating those problems when they’re small, and cheaper to treat.
How about the moral issue? I agree there’s a moral argument to be made for living within your means. I don’t indulge in luxuries I can’t afford, that’s irresponsible. There is a difference however in saying I shouldn’t have a luxurious house, and I should have no house at all. The first has implications only for me, a cost only to me, the latter has greater implications for society. While we may not want to help those we deem less deserving, we certainly, according to my understanding of the Bible, have an obligation to do for those who can’t do for themselves, whether it’s widows, orphans, the elderly, the disabled, or the poor. I seem to remember a few Bible verses to this effect, one in particular along the lines of; “what you have done for the least of me you have also done for me”.
Let’s explore the social cost. Imagine a world where any of these people did not have access to quality health care, and thus did not live long enough to make an impact on the world:
Stephen Hawking, Lance Armstrong, Randy Pausch (this one brings me to tears), Christopher Reeve, Sam Donaldson, Sue Myrick, John McCain, Steve Jobs. There are more, but my brain is not willing to cooperate today, so I’ll leave it there. I think I made the point.
What about the personal cost? We humans like to think we’re immune to life’s bitter moments, but none of us are exempt from standing in front of the big dartboard we call risk. My personal history is a perfect example. None of my Grandparents had cancer. My father and all his siblings did. My Mother died of it far too young. Her brother has thus far avoided that problem, but his daughter has not. Lots of people look at their family history and think they have nothing to worry about. Genetic mutations, for cancer, and other diseases, can arise spontaneously. What if it’s your wife, your child, your brother or sister, yourself? If you’re reading this, and you are against a public option, or universal coverage (by whatever means we cobble that together) I want you to sit and think: you’re in your doctor’s office, and you’re being told you have cancer. It’s terminal. If you could have afforded to come in back when those first symptoms had started, we might have been able to save you (if you had the money or insurance to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to save your life). Think about going home, and telling your loved ones. Think of what they’ll go through. Think of your spouse and children surviving without you. Think about the look on your children’s faces as you tell them.
I’ve been there. It sucks. Thankfully I lived.
If I had one wish, it would be that we could all see that when it comes to health care, we’re all in this together, whether we chose to be, or not. We must work together, discuss, brainstorm, plan, evaluate, together, right, left, liberal, conservative. We can’t talk about rhetoric, or stories or lies. We can’t talk about fears, or political pablum. We have to talk about realities, facts, data, hard, measurable, quantifiable evidence.
We have to talk about the truth.
We have to plan our future, lest it be planned for us.
Hi! I am here from Here be Hippogriffs. I am very impressed with the quality of your arguments. So often people forget we are already paying a high price for other people’s health care. So financially it is a better deal to have a plan rather than letting everyone else pad your bill. The other thing that few people seem to admit but infant mortality rates are lower and longevity rates higher in countries with national health care plans. But for me the moral argument is the strongest. While you quote the Bible there is also “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. We all need a helping hand sometime. Let’s extend our hands now to those who need health care.
Bravo, carosgram!
Another statistic I’ve seen floating around lately where we fail miserably is preventable deaths. That and infant mortality are… particularly sobering.
Thanks for the comment/compliment. Much obliged.
Here via Julia @ Hippogriffs. I’m all for national healthcare, but want it to be reasonable. I’m the type who is educated enough to know when I have a cold, I can get some Tylenol cold to help w/ my symptoms and nothing the Dr gives me is going to get me through it faster than 7-10 days. I don’t go to the doc for every bump or bruise or sniffle. But I know tons of people on government healthcare who do – because they can, because it doesn’t cost them anything. Or they go to the ER since they can’t be turned away, which costs loads more, but they’re not going to pay for it, so why not?
My nephews have cystic fibrosis. There is NO ONE in the family history who had CF, so it was a pretty surprising diagnosis, since it’s a genetic disease. Their early lives were spent in Sweden where they have national health care (socialist country) so my sister & BIL were not forced to pay for their treatments and medicines beyond a family “deductible” of $500 per year (one months supply of CF meds covered that). I’m not about socialism, but it would be awfully nice if we could get that level of care here, wouldn’t it? I know it won’t happen for a myriad of reasons, but it would sure be nice.
I absolutely agree. In fact, I wrote this post a few weeks ago exploring just this issue.
Of the many reasons I support universal coverage, the fact that we spend more is one of the main reasons. Yet the cautionary tale we can take from the financial struggles the Canadian and British systems are experiencing is we can not make it cheap to be a heavy health care consumer. It has to cost people enough so they think about whether they really want to spend that co-pay, but not so much that they just go because it’s free. You’re right, that is exactly what happens with our current safety net, and it will bankrupt us if there isn’t adequate cost sharing built in.