discussion over affordable health care. But here are some more of my thoughts for what they are worth.
Julie Borowski has her opinions about the Affordable Healthcare Act and expresses some of them via her YouTube channel. You can see her comments here. She monetized here videos so you'll have to watch a short ad before her little talk. In this particular episode, Julie raises two issues. One has to do with the functionality of the federal web site... I have nothing to say about that as it is for all intents and purposes a non-issue other than some embarrassment for those responsible and fodder for unhelpful, insubstantial and irrelevant criticism (not that I don't think there should have been a lot of care putting the site together and making sure it was highly usable in the first place so as not provide such fodder and has little to do with the real issue of health care in the USA).
The other issue has to do with the requirement that everyone have some form of medical insurance. Julie is young - 20 something I would guess. She doesn't want to have to buy insurance because she is young and healthy and doesn't need the services whereas it's all the old people who use medical services and she doesn't want to pay for their medical care (fact check: According to the CDC of all emergency department visits in 2007 45.8% were made by folks in the 15-45 age range and 36.7% were kids 0-14 years old who are mostly the children of the 20-44 age range group accounting for 82.5% of ED usage whereas those in the 45 and older group accounted for 39.1% of ED use. hmmmmmm). Her argument is full of holes but she uses lots of cynical humor which seems to carry the argument for many. Also, as I commented elsewhere:
...the young and healthy won't be young and healthy in 20, 30, 40 years... whose going to pay for their health care when the time comes and they "suddenly" need health care... or will they simply refuse health care when they are no longer young and healthy... Oh, and another by-the-way, I'm guessing all these young and healthy who don't want to pay for other folks care haven't given much thought to the $241,000+ spent on keeping them healthy up to their 18th birthday... what if all the "old people" had the same attitude toward the young and healthy?However, there is a real issue behind her fuzzy headed thinking - pooling resources for the common good. We do it all the time for all kinds of things even those not currently paying into the pool. For example our road systems we use everyday. Other examples would be our public school system, law enforcement, legal representation to name a few. Then there are the hidden ones like supplementing the farmers who produce our food and other consumables but can't make a living at it and need subsidies to grow, or NOT grow certain crops. Some of these things are so ubiquitous that we are hardly conscious of why or how they come to be available to us especially for many of the younger members of our society.
One of the questions is whether or not health care is something we want to classify as what we call a right. And if not a right, is it the right thing to do as a community to insure accessibility to healthcare for all members of our society. Does it benefit our society to insure that adequate health care is accessible to all members of our society? What is adequate health care? Another of the questions is how do we afford/pay for the state-of-the-art healthcare available today, which has only been available as it is today for less than a century. The issue is this: The current advances in healthcare are expensive and require some kind of corporate funding process if we are going to sustain them and "benefit" from them. Even if it's only the wealthy who have access to the most modern advances... those advances come at a cost to all of us, wealthy or not, through community funded research whether public funding or private fund raising, .
It seems to me that we have to answer this question before we can move on to addressing the craziness of our current system. Is healthcare a right as we have decided education up to a certain level is, or is it a convenience that should be left in the realm of personal choice as to whether I seek it out and pay for it out of my own resources? This made sense up to the first couple of decades of the 20th century before the explosion of modern medical science, institutionalization of medical care and stricter and more rigorous training became the norm for practitioners of the medical arts. As mentioned, health care fell into the second category up to the early to mid 1900's but with the increasing costs associated with the development of the medical/industrial complex how to pay for it's benefits became more complex with the evolution of what we now call medical insurance as we have come to know and experience it. At the same time it seems we as a nation have failed to be as rational about access to health care as we have been toward research and development of health care procedures.
I'm not advocating for or against the current "Affordable Healthcare Act." I'm not convinced that pumping money into the insurance system is a solution to accessibility. I am convinced that the emotional rhetoric that is being used to "debate" the issue is not going to move the discussion forward... for example this "conversation" which ends up going nowhere.