Health and Wealth Re-distribution –
There have been numerous discussions again about the idea of finding ways to make sure Americans are gaining access to reasonable housing and health care plans in the U.S. In the 1990s the Clinton Administration took a swing at the idea and almost suffered a political catastrophe. The Democrats were overtaken by a wave of Republicans and their Contract with America in 1994, promising to reduce the size of government and become wiser spenders of the taxpayer’s money. Americans at the time felt that healthcare reform, although an “issue,” wasn’t ready for government takeover.
Fast forward 12 years later, and we see that after the Big Three U.S. Motor companies have struggled to pay their health obligations to their employees, and how health costs have really skyrocketed despite “competition” among the health insurance providers, Americans have probably moved a little closer to some type of universal health care. Democrats and some Republicans are calling for insurance plans. States across the country are moving forward with some type of insurance for their residents.
Health care prices are not showing any signs of declining anytime soon, which most likely means…wealth redistribution.
Some of you out there cringe at the thought of the Robin Hood Complex many have—it’s the desire to take from “the Rich” and give to “the Poor, Hard Working, and Middle Class Americans.” The latter group, of course, usually means “everybody who makes less than a million dollars a year.”
Before going on, I’d like to say that I try to avoid partisan political issues as much as possible on this site—however, sometimes financial well-being unavoidably crosses into the field of politics. If you fear the worst, this is a good time to stop reading and move to another article. You have been warned.
I think that every American should have access to low cost (read: not free) insurance and housing. Most Americans feel the same way. However, who pays? That’s where the question of Wealth Distribution comes in. Some people believe in the concept of “from each according to ability, to each according to need.” Although historically, I have been against this, I think that moving forward we may not have much of a choice. Whether implemented on the state level of the national level, some form of Wealth Distribution is coming. One plan that I wouldn’t mind getting behind (at least in the abstract) is Ben Stein’s idea of raising the taxes of those who have earn 5 million dollars or more annually and using the revenues to provide low-cost (not free) health care to individuals who have no coverage at all.
Wealth gatherers generally find creative ways to exploit the current capitalist system. Capitalism, by definition, is designed to reward those who produce, and it can be harsh to those who choose not to participate. It’s hard work to succeed in our system, no doubt. However, there are many others who haven’t had such opportunities (or the tools) to succeed, and we should provide basic care so that average people who work hard aren’t put out on the street because of a health bill. And with many companies reducing or eliminating health care options, this issue will rise to the top soon, and we have to be ready to meet these challenges head on. Besides, you may become wealthy through your prudence, but eventually, you may not be able to run away from the problems within your community forever. As a rule I take a “fly above the fray” approach to problems like these, but even I realize that this problem isn’t going to solve itself.
So what do you think? Personally, I would start with an idea that we apply towards education: we seem to use the lottery to fund education, why not start using lottery funds to cover health care on a state level? It may help with the whole wealth distribution thing. Some people say that lotteries is like the Robin Hood complex in reverse—most of the players are from the lower class, and most lotteries fund college education (which is attended mostly by the middle and upper classes). Using a lottery for health care may help those who can’t afford health care get some basic services. This is a catch-22 if there ever was one—I don’t encourage spending more than 1% of income on lotteries per year, and that’s only for entertainment purposes only—but it could possibly help.
Just an idea though. What do you think?
There have been numerous discussions again about the idea of finding ways to make sure Americans are gaining access to reasonable housing and health care plans in the U.S. In the 1990s the Clinton Administration took a swing at the idea and almost suffered a political catastrophe. The Democrats were overtaken by a wave of Republicans and their Contract with America in 1994, promising to reduce the size of government and become wiser spenders of the taxpayer’s money. Americans at the time felt that healthcare reform, although an “issue,” wasn’t ready for government takeover.
Fast forward 12 years later, and we see that after the Big Three U.S. Motor companies have struggled to pay their health obligations to their employees, and how health costs have really skyrocketed despite “competition” among the health insurance providers, Americans have probably moved a little closer to some type of universal health care. Democrats and some Republicans are calling for insurance plans. States across the country are moving forward with some type of insurance for their residents.
Health care prices are not showing any signs of declining anytime soon, which most likely means…wealth redistribution.
Some of you out there cringe at the thought of the Robin Hood Complex many have—it’s the desire to take from “the Rich” and give to “the Poor, Hard Working, and Middle Class Americans.” The latter group, of course, usually means “everybody who makes less than a million dollars a year.”
Before going on, I’d like to say that I try to avoid partisan political issues as much as possible on this site—however, sometimes financial well-being unavoidably crosses into the field of politics. If you fear the worst, this is a good time to stop reading and move to another article. You have been warned.
I think that every American should have access to low cost (read: not free) insurance and housing. Most Americans feel the same way. However, who pays? That’s where the question of Wealth Distribution comes in. Some people believe in the concept of “from each according to ability, to each according to need.” Although historically, I have been against this, I think that moving forward we may not have much of a choice. Whether implemented on the state level of the national level, some form of Wealth Distribution is coming. One plan that I wouldn’t mind getting behind (at least in the abstract) is Ben Stein’s idea of raising the taxes of those who have earn 5 million dollars or more annually and using the revenues to provide low-cost (not free) health care to individuals who have no coverage at all.
Wealth gatherers generally find creative ways to exploit the current capitalist system. Capitalism, by definition, is designed to reward those who produce, and it can be harsh to those who choose not to participate. It’s hard work to succeed in our system, no doubt. However, there are many others who haven’t had such opportunities (or the tools) to succeed, and we should provide basic care so that average people who work hard aren’t put out on the street because of a health bill. And with many companies reducing or eliminating health care options, this issue will rise to the top soon, and we have to be ready to meet these challenges head on. Besides, you may become wealthy through your prudence, but eventually, you may not be able to run away from the problems within your community forever. As a rule I take a “fly above the fray” approach to problems like these, but even I realize that this problem isn’t going to solve itself.
So what do you think? Personally, I would start with an idea that we apply towards education: we seem to use the lottery to fund education, why not start using lottery funds to cover health care on a state level? It may help with the whole wealth distribution thing. Some people say that lotteries is like the Robin Hood complex in reverse—most of the players are from the lower class, and most lotteries fund college education (which is attended mostly by the middle and upper classes). Using a lottery for health care may help those who can’t afford health care get some basic services. This is a catch-22 if there ever was one—I don’t encourage spending more than 1% of income on lotteries per year, and that’s only for entertainment purposes only—but it could possibly help.
Just an idea though. What do you think?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment