Free Health Care vs Free Food and Water

[c9]

Paul Wells raises a simple question that I don't have a good answer for: if we consider food and water and health care all essential to life, why is there no government monopoly over food and water, but there is over health care?

I strongly support the idea of government-paid-for and you-can't-buy-better health care, but I'm very interested in hearing arguments that make me rethink my position. Mostly, I'm concerned that:

• Groups of people screw stuff up (in government we call this bureaucracy and red tape, but it exists in business too) but in government the overall goal is different than in a business (very roughly: "help" instead of "profit").
  
• A business is legally obligated to make money for shareholders, while governments don't have that restriction. This is not a bug, it's a feature.
• A so-called two-tier system (where the rich folk can buy faster care) would cause the better medical professionals to go where the money is, and then the care would worsen in quality and speed for the rest of the population.

So anyway: does this mean that I should support socialized food and water in addition to medicine? I don't know. But it's interesting to think about.

I haven't seen SiCKO yet, but hope to soon. I'm not really the target audience though.

Comments

[sisyphus238.livejournal.com]

Who pays for the fire department, or the police?
It's a point made in the movie that we don't question those public services but when it comes to universal health care, it's a different ball of wax. Since you're Canadian, it's a completely other ball of wax as well. The occupied territory to your south could learn something from your more, in my opinion, civilized country.

[c9.livejournal.com]

Very true -- but another way to think about this: not *everyone* pays for fire/police, only the rich do. (here I'm defining rich as "not dirt poor" for simplicity) Why do they do it? Maybe because crime and fires hurt their property values?

It's a very cynical argument, but it fits the situation. If someone is poor and can't get health care, it doesn't affect my health care. If someone's house burns down, it could spread to my house.

[sisyphus238.livejournal.com]

I think there's a moral issue that isn't covered by utilitarian arguments. The thing is that in the US, we pay taxes that pay for fire departments, police, etc. and on top of that, if we have health insurance, we pay ever increasing premiums on policies that are intended to line the pockets of the insurance companies, not necessarily to cover our costs in the event of an emergency - and 40 million of us don't even have health insurance. I recently lost my job and with it what meager insurance I did have. I'm lucky because I'm healthy and take care of myself but should I have an accident I'm up the creek. Then there's the cost of drugs, the ads for which we are constantly bombarded, which are beyond the means of many older Americans who then are reduced to choosing between not taking the prescribed amount or cutting expenses in some other way to afford them. It's a racket. When bus loads of retirees head up to Canada to buy cheaper drugs it must mean something.

[sisyphus238.livejournal.com]

Happy Birthday by the way!

[c9.livejournal.com]

Thanks!