HEATHER IJAMES: Healthcare proposals chip away at capitalism
| Friday, Nov 27 2009 09:00 AM
Last Updated Friday, Nov 27 2009 09:00 AM
Loading Stories
Advertisement
Images:
Felix Adamo / The Californian Heather Ijames
I know there have been plenty of healthcare articles of late. Even one of my conservative co-columnists, Ric Llewellyn, wrote a piece about it a few weeks ago. But I think that's what started my panic. Panic is stating it lightly, though.
Annual enrollment for health insurance coverage is upon many employees right now, myself included, for the upcoming year. At first, I thought this would be like any other year, and we could just sail through enrollment without making any changes. But in the spirit of reading the fine print before I offer my John Hancock, I realized there was a big change. A huge one. And it meant switching from my PPO to an HMO.
I know, I know ... not many people are going to cry that I don't get my cushy PPO anymore. But it's not really the downgrading that bothers me as much as the schematics of an HMO under a universal healthcare proposal that has me up in arms.
And here's why: If you have, let's say, a cyst in your throat, under an HMO you would have to see your primary doctor, and then be referred to an ear, nose and throat specialist. Two trips. Inconvenient, sure, but inconvenience is like a sugar cookie compared to what it would be like under universal healthcare. I think that cyst in your throat will have grown to the size of a plum by the time you're allowed to see your primary doctor, and a cantaloupe by the time you get to your specialist.
I don't really want to get into the details, though. Ric did a good job of that. Others have, too. Instead, what I want to talk to you about is plain and simple capitalism.
Though the lines seem to be blurring over this last year, America is a capitalistic country. That inherently means that some will have more capital than others. More capital means more options. Health insurance is currently an option. Healthcare is not. Healthcare is available to everyone (through free clinics), and simply because people with less capital want the same option of care as someone with more capital doesn't mean they're entitled to get it.
You see, I have been all over the health insurance board. I've been without insurance, waiting four hours in a free clinic to get one dose of an antibiotic, and I've been to the top of the heap with my soon-to-be lost PPO. You want to know the difference between the free clinic and the PPO? C-a-p-i-t-a-l.
Do the proponents of universal healthcare really want to say it's not fair that some have more capital than others? They can if they want, I guess; it's a fairly popular idea in certain socialist countries.
I compare the theory behind universal healthcare (at least as it's being proposed to Congress) to be as asinine as the idea of banks suddenly handing out mortgages on huge houses for people who don't qualify for them. Oh wait, they already did that. OK, strike that. I compare it to the State Bar of California proposing it is unfair that only individuals with a legal education receive a lawyer's salary, and anyone who wants a lawyer's salary should be entitled to one, without the onerous hurdle of an education.
"That's not the same thing!" proponents of universal healthcare will shout. Yeah, it is. Both examples say that the freedom to acquire capital, by your abilities alone, is less important than the common need. They both say that capital should be given, not earned. Again, this is the war cry of socialism.
I assure you I'm not as heartless as I'll undoubtedly be accused of. I feel a tremendous amount of empathy for families who have no health insurance. I was one of them. And I might be there again one day. And if I am, I'll do what I did then. I'll wait patiently and hope my tide turns, because even I know we can't all live in Seven Oaks at the same time.
You get what you earn: That is the heart of capitalism. This healthcare dilemma isn't about evening the scales. It's about chipping away capitalism; the government thinks it knows how to manage us better than it thinks we know how to.
I'm not saying healthcare doesn't need to be reformed. But making healthcare a government operated entity? Oh mercy, no.
-- Heather Ijames is one of four conservative community columnists whose work appears here every Saturday. These are the opinions of Ijames, not necessarily The Californian's. You can send e-mail to her at hijames@bakersfield.com.
Next week: Inga Barks.
