Get E-Mail Updates

Three Keys to Reforming Health Care: T.R. Reid's The Healing of America

A couple of weeks ago I previewed T.R. Reid's The Healing of America. I'm happy to see that today it is #18 on Amazon's sales ranking, #11 on Publishers Weekly's hardcover nonfiction best-seller list, and #6 on the New York Times hardcover nonfiction best-seller list. With Congress deadlocked on health-care reform and President Obama scheduled to speak to the nation about health care tomorrow night, this is a book everyone should read. Immediately.

Related Reading

Take Action on This Issue

Tell the Senate: Don't Cut International Aid

Please join us in telling the Senate: Protect foreign aid programs that help the poor and the needy. 

Here are three of Reid's most important points:

1. "The primary issue for any health care system is a moral one." If we believe no one should die for want of access to health care, we can find a way to provide care for all. If we believe health care is a commodity like TVs and automobiles, we can continue to exclude those who can't pay. "All the developed countries I looked at provide health coverage for every resident, old or young, rich or poor. This is the underlying moral principle of the health care system in every rich country -- every one, that is, except the United States."

2. It is possible to improve health care and save money at the same time. Hey, those other rich nations that provide health care to everybody spend about half as much per capita as the United States spends, and their citizens also live longer and enjoy better health. If we are willing to study the ways other developed nations handle health care, we're smart enough to devise an approach that suits our needs.

And by the way, we don't need to fear "socialized medicine," whatever that may be. As Reid points out, "the term was popularized by a public relations firm working for the American Medical Association in 1947 to disparage President Truman's proposal for a national health care system. It was a label, at the dawn of the cold war, meant to suggest that anybody advocating universal access to health care must be a communist." In fact, successful health-care systems in other countries have widely varying approaches, ranging from public funding and public health-care provision (Britain) to private insurance and private providers (Germany, Japan, France, Belgium, Switzerland, Japan). In fact, some European systems are considerably more private than ours.

Nor do we need to fear loss of choice: almost all developed nations allow more choice of provider than our insurance companies currently permit, and some also have more insurance companies to choose among.

3. The biggest source of waste in American health care comes from our approach to insurance: "20 cents of every dollar people pay in premiums for health insurance doesn't buy any health care." Insurance per se isn't the problem. Many developed countries, like the United States, rely on competing private insurance companies to pay health-care bills. There is just one major difference between their systems and ours: most of our private insurance is for-profit, and all of their insurance that pays for basic health care is not for-profit.

Reid does not discuss the army of lobbyists currently working feverishly to sway public opinion and persuade Congress to veto any significant reform, nor does he mention the enormous contributions made by health-care lobbyists over the last five years to key senators and members of Congress. His book was completed before Wendell Potter, former head of corporate communications at CIGNA, blew the whistle on common unfair industry practices, so he doesn't mention Potter either. Likewise, he is silent about possibly excessive executive compensation at health insurance companies.

Reid is not concerned with abuse and corruption in the health-care industry so much as with flaws in the system itself. Even operating at its best and most honest, a for-profit insurance system cannot provide health care for everybody as cheaply as a not for-profit private company or a public system. This is counter-intuitive to free-market advocates, but Reid backs up his assertions with figures: contrast 20% administrative costs in America with 6% in Canada, 5% in France and Britain, and less than 2% in Taiwan.

1. Again (this is Reid's most important point): "The primary issue for any health care system is a moral one." If we have the will to care for all our people, we will find a way. I was thinking about that Sunday while listening to the day's readings from the Revised Common Lectionary:

The rich and the poor have this in common:
the LORD is the maker of them all.
Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity,
and the rod of anger will fail.
Those who are generous are blessed,
for they share their bread with the poor.
Do not rob the poor because they are poor,
or crush the afflicted at the gate;
for the LORD pleads their cause
and despoils of life those who despoil them.
--from Proverbs 22

Listen, my beloved brothers and sisters. Has not God chosen the poor in the world to be rich in faith and to be heirs of the kingdom that he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor. Is it not the rich who oppress you? Is it not they who drag you into court? Is it not they who blaspheme the excellent name that was invoked over you? ... If a brother or sister is naked and lacks daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," and yet you do not supply their bodily needs, what is the good of that?
--from James 2

My PhotoLaVonne Neff is an amateur theologian and cook; lover of language and travel; wife, mother, grandmother, godmother, dogmother; perpetual student, constant reader, and Christian contrarian. She blogs at Lively Dust.

To learn more about health-care reform, click here to visit Sojourners' Health-Care Resources Web page.

Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

by: Bungarra

09-10-2009 @ 12:08pm

As an observer of this controversy, "socialism' is often referred to as something to be avoided. Is this the so-called 'socialism' of a Cuba or North Korea, or the approach taken by the Nordic countries such as Sweden? Not the same animal!

As I have suggested before, copying the Japanese will halve your costs and reduce the trauma of sickness on your poor. There will be an increase in life expectancy which is a reasonable measure of success of health policies.

by: xfree9

09-10-2009 @ 10:35pm

Whether we call it socialism or not, a centrally-planned or centrally-controlled economy or society is not ideal nor is it ethical. Rule of law is necessary to "keep the peace," so to speak, so if there must be government, it is to keep people from violating each other's rights to freedom of choice and purposeful behavior.

So the difference between the "bad socialism" and what some call the "good socialism" is merely a matter of the lesser of two "evils." What should matter is that we stand for what is the best, not simply what might look or appear to be better. There are so many things we can imitate from other countries. Central command from the top is not one of them.

by: jdquest

09-11-2009 @ 1:06am

It does make ou suspicious of just who is posting comments here.

by: Bungarra

09-11-2009 @ 1:34am

G'day
A few random thoughts.
I am glad some one took up the comment. While Australians have a reasonable
good knowledge of the US - 93% of our media is dominated by your stuff, (and
during the negotiations of the free trade agreement, your media objected to
us requiring some Australian content on TV/Radio) some of the fine details
escape us. That is even for a person like me who has 6 generations of
American heritage on my mother's side.
From the tone of some what we see, what Americans call 'left' can be just
right of center for us, and the word socialism seems to translate
interchangeable with Stalinist Communism.
In the US, the word socialism seems to have considerably different overtones
than it does in Australia. Here there is a strong component of the concept
of The Public Good. Ie services which are good for the community, so the
value of which cannot be captured by any particular suppler to fund that
service are funded by the public purse. I guess defence is one such good,
proper management of the environment, or food and drug standards are others.
However the use of pork barrelling to ensure politic benefits for some areas
breaks down that 'public good' issue.
Also have a look at the Australian concept of "Mateship" and 'fair go'.
I was in India a few weeks ago, the traffic is horrible, westerners do not
even think about driving. The death rate on the roads is 30 times that of
Australia per mile travelled. The enforcement of good road rules/vehicle
safety etc is a neglected public good there. Returning via SW China (to see
where I was born) it is a piece of cake in comparison.
My wife is setting up a slum project in Calcutta for widows/children. One
woman in the group was killed a couple of weeks ago. She was going to
relive herself behind a shipping container, got the Ok to go, and they
dropped a container on her. Life is cheap.
There are issues of the low tax versus high tax approach which was
Ragenomics or the British version of the disease. The chooks are coming
home to roost on some of that - (chooks - Australian slang for chickens).
There are many problems with those privatized services in many parts of the
world in the maintenance of the service at a cost/convenience that was
possible under the 'inefficient public' service before.
Your comments are interesting, but I would beg to differ. We do not live on
a continually expanding frontier in a self sufficit situation. That has
closed. We depend on the social cohesion of the social network which is
currently most often the nation state, for our security and well being.
Case in point Somalia.
The fruits of the civilization depend on a cooperative social organisation,
not might is right. Likewise, to say that the fruits of my labour are not
dependant on others contribution is incorrect. So we have obligations to
others. Just try to organise your self in the Australian outback alone with
out support. You would be back to the Stone Age and depending on the good
will of the local group to survive.
It is considered to be an American heresy the over emphasise on the primacy
of personal rights over to the level that there is a denial of the
obligations of the citizens to a social network.
Likewise we need control of the warlords, be it the afghan model or the
Monsanto's of the world. I have observed some multinationals in action and
there is a push to maintain market share by all means including war. Have a
look at the history of the Nation Fruit company in Central America.
A company I worked for fought an action to prevent Monsanto from succeeding
with a request for anti dumping duties on Chinese chemical. That would have
increased costs to our farmers who are suffering from US and EU subsidies
which significantly depress the world price of wheat etc.
Yes, I am in the process of retiring, and have just taken a large hit in my
superannuation due to US carelessness in managing its economy. The Chinese
would have shot a few bankers by now.
Re health care, we are not perfect, but there is a safety net for all, few
go bankrupt though illness, you have your choices of doctors etc, and you
have the option of personal insurance for extras.
Yes our life expectancy ranks only 10th, not higher due in part to the
shameful situation re the Aboriginal in this country.
The question I ask is why the US is not doing better re health. You spend
at least twice as much as we do, or Japan (number 1) does. Possibly like
us, you have allowed the lawyers to take too much out of the system through
over servicing/higher insurance to prevent/cope with any litigation.
Interestingly, NZ has a public system which deals with accidents etc which
has a set pension /compensation where there are problems resulting in long
term damage and has taken that issue out of the courts.
Occasionally our governments get some viruses from your lobbyists and want
to muck up a functioning system in the interest of private choice. That
usually is code for rationing and reduced public spending. They tend to get
hammered at the next election when the emperor is shown to have no clothes.
This does not only apply to health, there have been attempts on public
education as well.
One other issue is the excessive price the US pays for drugs. Carefully
examine your IP laws and reduce the barriers for entry of overseas generic
drugs with out reducing standards. To have 2 lobbyists for pharmaceutical
companies per congress person is a good indication of over kill.
The EU is currently taking a few companies to court re market collusion - re
about 4-5 bill. We have the same problems here of attempts of market
corruption and undue influence of the regulators.
Yet I do not think I delusional about socialism etc. I watched the Red Army
victory parade in Shanghai, have followed the CIM/OMF reports over the
years, and have had many dealings with refugees starting with listening to
stories from White Russians in China. Yet the hard nosed private good at all
costs does not wash with me as well.
Any dictatorship be it commercial supported by corrupted IP laws, have huge
funds to corrupt laws, or a political situation, rule of drug lords etc is
not good or an imperial attitude in a Church. Consider the ".. eye for eye
and tooth for tooth.." can be abused, yet is very very democratic in
concept. We all have equal rights before the law etc independent of our
abilities to hire lawyers, bribe, be a member of the party or not etc.
Interesting, just what are the rights of a non person eg a company?
Private enterprise with a social face to soften/moderate the exesses is the
path I would suggest. Did not you break up some monoplies in the 1890's to
imporve the common good?

Thanks for you comments.

Bit difficult, but if we are nearby, we should share coffee some time.

Cheers

John Holmes
46 Gallagher St, Eden Hill, 6054
Ph (08) 9377 0607
Mob 0400 185 458
Email homesjc@iprimus.com.au

by: xfree9

09-10-2009 @ 10:35pm

Whether we call it socialism or not, a centrally-planned or centrally-controlled economy or society is not ideal nor is it ethical. Rule of law is necessary to "keep the peace," so to speak, so if there must be government, it is to keep people from violating each other's rights to freedom of choice and purposeful behavior.

So the difference between the "bad socialism" and what some call the "good socialism" is merely a matter of the lesser of two "evils." What should matter is that we stand for what is the best, not simply what might look or appear to be better. There are so many things we can imitate from other countries. Central command from the top is not one of them.

by: jdquest

09-11-2009 @ 1:06am

It does make ou suspicious of just who is posting comments here.

by: Bungarra

09-11-2009 @ 1:34am

G'day
A few random thoughts.
I am glad some one took up the comment. While Australians have a reasonable
good knowledge of the US - 93% of our media is dominated by your stuff, (and
during the negotiations of the free trade agreement, your media objected to
us requiring some Australian content on TV/Radio) some of the fine details
escape us. That is even for a person like me who has 6 generations of
American heritage on my mother's side.
From the tone of some what we see, what Americans call 'left' can be just
right of center for us, and the word socialism seems to translate
interchangeable with Stalinist Communism.
In the US, the word socialism seems to have considerably different overtones
than it does in Australia. Here there is a strong component of the concept
of The Public Good. Ie services which are good for the community, so the
value of which cannot be captured by any particular suppler to fund that
service are funded by the public purse. I guess defence is one such good,
proper management of the environment, or food and drug standards are others.
However the use of pork barrelling to ensure politic benefits for some areas
breaks down that 'public good' issue.
Also have a look at the Australian concept of "Mateship" and 'fair go'.
I was in India a few weeks ago, the traffic is horrible, westerners do not
even think about driving. The death rate on the roads is 30 times that of
Australia per mile travelled. The enforcement of good road rules/vehicle
safety etc is a neglected public good there. Returning via SW China (to see
where I was born) it is a piece of cake in comparison.
My wife is setting up a slum project in Calcutta for widows/children. One
woman in the group was killed a couple of weeks ago. She was going to
relive herself behind a shipping container, got the Ok to go, and they
dropped a container on her. Life is cheap.
There are issues of the low tax versus high tax approach which was
Ragenomics or the British version of the disease. The chooks are coming
home to roost on some of that - (chooks - Australian slang for chickens).
There are many problems with those privatized services in many parts of the
world in the maintenance of the service at a cost/convenience that was
possible under the 'inefficient public' service before.
Your comments are interesting, but I would beg to differ. We do not live on
a continually expanding frontier in a self sufficit situation. That has
closed. We depend on the social cohesion of the social network which is
currently most often the nation state, for our security and well being.
Case in point Somalia.
The fruits of the civilization depend on a cooperative social organisation,
not might is right. Likewise, to say that the fruits of my labour are not
dependant on others contribution is incorrect. So we have obligations to
others. Just try to organise your self in the Australian outback alone with
out support. You would be back to the Stone Age and depending on the good
will of the local group to survive.
It is considered to be an American heresy the over emphasise on the primacy
of personal rights over to the level that there is a denial of the
obligations of the citizens to a social network.
Likewise we need control of the warlords, be it the afghan model or the
Monsanto's of the world. I have observed some multinationals in action and
there is a push to maintain market share by all means including war. Have a
look at the history of the Nation Fruit company in Central America.
A company I worked for fought an action to prevent Monsanto from succeeding
with a request for anti dumping duties on Chinese chemical. That would have
increased costs to our farmers who are suffering from US and EU subsidies
which significantly depress the world price of wheat etc.
Yes, I am in the process of retiring, and have just taken a large hit in my
superannuation due to US carelessness in managing its economy. The Chinese
would have shot a few bankers by now.
Re health care, we are not perfect, but there is a safety net for all, few
go bankrupt though illness, you have your choices of doctors etc, and you
have the option of personal insurance for extras.
Yes our life expectancy ranks only 10th, not higher due in part to the
shameful situation re the Aboriginal in this country.
The question I ask is why the US is not doing better re health. You spend
at least twice as much as we do, or Japan (number 1) does. Possibly like
us, you have allowed the lawyers to take too much out of the system through
over servicing/higher insurance to prevent/cope with any litigation.
Interestingly, NZ has a public system which deals with accidents etc which
has a set pension /compensation where there are problems resulting in long
term damage and has taken that issue out of the courts.
Occasionally our governments get some viruses from your lobbyists and want
to muck up a functioning system in the interest of private choice. That
usually is code for rationing and reduced public spending. They tend to get
hammered at the next election when the emperor is shown to have no clothes.
This does not only apply to health, there have been attempts on public
education as well.
One other issue is the excessive price the US pays for drugs. Carefully
examine your IP laws and reduce the barriers for entry of overseas generic
drugs with out reducing standards. To have 2 lobbyists for pharmaceutical
companies per congress person is a good indication of over kill.
The EU is currently taking a few companies to court re market collusion - re
about 4-5 bill. We have the same problems here of attempts of market
corruption and undue influence of the regulators.
Yet I do not think I delusional about socialism etc. I watched the Red Army
victory parade in Shanghai, have followed the CIM/OMF reports over the
years, and have had many dealings with refugees starting with listening to
stories from White Russians in China. Yet the hard nosed private good at all
costs does not wash with me as well.
Any dictatorship be it commercial supported by corrupted IP laws, have huge
funds to corrupt laws, or a political situation, rule of drug lords etc is
not good or an imperial attitude in a Church. Consider the ".. eye for eye
and tooth for tooth.." can be abused, yet is very very democratic in
concept. We all have equal rights before the law etc independent of our
abilities to hire lawyers, bribe, be a member of the party or not etc.
Interesting, just what are the rights of a non person eg a company?
Private enterprise with a social face to soften/moderate the exesses is the
path I would suggest. Did not you break up some monoplies in the 1890's to
imporve the common good?

Thanks for you comments.

Bit difficult, but if we are nearby, we should share coffee some time.

Cheers

John Holmes
46 Gallagher St, Eden Hill, 6054
Ph (08) 9377 0607
Mob 0400 185 458
Email homesjc@iprimus.com.au

by: AnnaKSimon

09-21-2009 @ 8:15pm

Apart from its blessed location at the tip of Limmat River, the city has some of breathtakingly wonderful attractions that include switzerland clothing Gothic Fraumunster, the Church of Our Lady, the Fluntern Cemetery where the soul of famous Irish writer James Joyce rests in peace.

by: AnnaKSimon

09-21-2009 @ 8:15pm

Apart from its blessed location at the tip of Limmat River, the city has some of breathtakingly wonderful attractions that include switzerland clothing Gothic Fraumunster, the Church of Our Lady, the Fluntern Cemetery where the soul of famous Irish writer James Joyce rests in peace.

by: pharmajobs

12-09-2009 @ 10:27am

The three keys to health care reform is very nice. Thanks for sharing it.

by: pharmajobs

12-09-2009 @ 10:27am

The three keys to health care reform is very nice. Thanks for sharing it.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 2:23pm

The Proverbs reference is a really great reference for this debate:
The rich and the poor have this in common:
the LORD is the maker of them all.
Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity,
and the rod of anger will fail.

Very true. When you unjustly declare the property of one person or group of persons as a "right" to another group, it is unjust. Indeed, calamity will be reaped.

Those who are generous are blessed,
for they share their bread with the poor.

Notice here that those who are generous will be blessed, not those who are generous with other people's labor and resources. Bringing social justice is not just if it means enacting laws that reflect the envious position of the so-called generous toward the property of those who are wealthy. I believe that if a person has wealth, it is their responsibility to do good with that wealth. If a person is not wealthy, or perhaps already gives everything they can toward social justice, the next step is to gather alongside their ethic and passions those who can also do more toward social justice.
Do not rob the poor because they are poor,
or crush the afflicted at the gate;
for the LORD pleads their cause
and despoils of life those who despoil them.

Social justice will also not truly exist when insurance companies are not living up to their end of the contract they have made, and when the defraud anybody, especially the poor. Also, if doctors are doing illegal operations or unethically treating somebody, the law needs to come to bear upon those who break it. Under the rule of law in a free market, nobody "takes from the poor" merely because they are poor, because the rule of law ensures whatever transactions take place occur voluntarily and non-coercively (which means peaceful activity).

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:19pm

Well said!

Those who ask for "Universal Health Care" should be careful what they ask for. Here are two very good articles discussing important ideas surrounding this issue.
http://mises.org/story/3609
http://mises.org/story/3666

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:29pm

Well said!

by: DRJ

09-09-2009 @ 9:28pm

I am constantly amazed that no matter what the topic or the author's use of a moral argument, the usual response from many posters reflects attitudes which just do not square with what Jesus would want from His followers. I find it grotesque that their hardheartedness toward their less fortunate brothers and sisters is often justified by distortion of Our Lord's message.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 9:53pm

How does it not square? You cannot make an accusation w/o addressing the specific arguments I and others have made.

I find no biblical or Christian justification for doing social justice by committing other injustices such as theft or slavery.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 2:23pm

The Proverbs reference is a really great reference for this debate:
The rich and the poor have this in common:
the LORD is the maker of them all.
Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity,
and the rod of anger will fail.

Very true. When you unjustly declare the property of one person or group of persons as a "right" to another group, it is unjust. Indeed, calamity will be reaped.

Those who are generous are blessed,
for they share their bread with the poor.

Notice here that those who are generous will be blessed, not those who are generous with other people's labor and resources. Bringing social justice is not just if it means enacting laws that reflect the envious position of the so-called generous toward the property of those who are wealthy. I believe that if a person has wealth, it is their responsibility to do good with that wealth. If a person is not wealthy, or perhaps already gives everything they can toward social justice, the next step is to gather alongside their ethic and passions those who can also do more toward social justice.
Do not rob the poor because they are poor,
or crush the afflicted at the gate;
for the LORD pleads their cause
and despoils of life those who despoil them.

Social justice will also not truly exist when insurance companies are not living up to their end of the contract they have made, and when the defraud anybody, especially the poor. Also, if doctors are doing illegal operations or unethically treating somebody, the law needs to come to bear upon those who break it. Under the rule of law in a free market, nobody "takes from the poor" merely because they are poor, because the rule of law ensures whatever transactions take place occur voluntarily and non-coercively (which means peaceful activity).

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:19pm

Well said!

Those who ask for "Universal Health Care" should be careful what they ask for. Here are two very good articles discussing important ideas surrounding this issue.
http://mises.org/story/3609
http://mises.org/story/3666

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:29pm

Well said!

by: DRJ

09-09-2009 @ 9:28pm

I am constantly amazed that no matter what the topic or the author's use of a moral argument, the usual response from many posters reflects attitudes which just do not square with what Jesus would want from His followers. I find it grotesque that their hardheartedness toward their less fortunate brothers and sisters is often justified by distortion of Our Lord's message.

by: Bungarra

09-10-2009 @ 12:08pm

As an observer of this controversy, "socialism' is often referred to as something to be avoided. Is this the so-called 'socialism' of a Cuba or North Korea, or the approach taken by the Nordic countries such as Sweden? Not the same animal!

As I have suggested before, copying the Japanese will halve your costs and reduce the trauma of sickness on your poor. There will be an increase in life expectancy which is a reasonable measure of success of health policies.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 9:53pm

How does it not square? You cannot make an accusation w/o addressing the specific arguments I and others have made.

I find no biblical or Christian justification for doing social justice by committing other injustices such as theft or slavery.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 2:23pm

The Proverbs reference is a really great reference for this debate:
The rich and the poor have this in common:
the LORD is the maker of them all.
Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity,
and the rod of anger will fail.

Very true. When you unjustly declare the property of one person or group of persons as a "right" to another group, it is unjust. Indeed, calamity will be reaped.

Those who are generous are blessed,
for they share their bread with the poor.

Notice here that those who are generous will be blessed, not those who are generous with other people's labor and resources. Bringing social justice is not just if it means enacting laws that reflect the envious position of the so-called generous toward the property of those who are wealthy. I believe that if a person has wealth, it is their responsibility to do good with that wealth. If a person is not wealthy, or perhaps already gives everything they can toward social justice, the next step is to gather alongside their ethic and passions those who can also do more toward social justice.
Do not rob the poor because they are poor,
or crush the afflicted at the gate;
for the LORD pleads their cause
and despoils of life those who despoil them.

Social justice will also not truly exist when insurance companies are not living up to their end of the contract they have made, and when the defraud anybody, especially the poor. Also, if doctors are doing illegal operations or unethically treating somebody, the law needs to come to bear upon those who break it. Under the rule of law in a free market, nobody "takes from the poor" merely because they are poor, because the rule of law ensures whatever transactions take place occur voluntarily and non-coercively (which means peaceful activity).

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 2:23pm

The Proverbs reference is a really great reference for this debate:
The rich and the poor have this in common:
the LORD is the maker of them all.
Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity,
and the rod of anger will fail.

Very true. When you unjustly declare the property of one person or group of persons as a "right" to another group, it is unjust. Indeed, calamity will be reaped.

Those who are generous are blessed,
for they share their bread with the poor.

Notice here that those who are generous will be blessed, not those who are generous with other people's labor and resources. Bringing social justice is not just if it means enacting laws that reflect the envious position of the so-called generous toward the property of those who are wealthy. I believe that if a person has wealth, it is their responsibility to do good with that wealth. If a person is not wealthy, or perhaps already gives everything they can toward social justice, the next step is to gather alongside their ethic and passions those who can also do more toward social justice.
Do not rob the poor because they are poor,
or crush the afflicted at the gate;
for the LORD pleads their cause
and despoils of life those who despoil them.

Social justice will also not truly exist when insurance companies are not living up to their end of the contract they have made, and when the defraud anybody, especially the poor. Also, if doctors are doing illegal operations or unethically treating somebody, the law needs to come to bear upon those who break it. Under the rule of law in a free market, nobody "takes from the poor" merely because they are poor, because the rule of law ensures whatever transactions take place occur voluntarily and non-coercively (which means peaceful activity).

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:19pm

Well said!

Those who ask for "Universal Health Care" should be careful what they ask for. Here are two very good articles discussing important ideas surrounding this issue.
http://mises.org/story/3609
http://mises.org/story/3666

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:19pm

Well said!

Those who ask for "Universal Health Care" should be careful what they ask for. Here are two very good articles discussing important ideas surrounding this issue.
http://mises.org/story/3609
http://mises.org/story/3666

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:29pm

Well said!

by: natcoz

09-09-2009 @ 8:29pm

Well said!

by: DRJ

09-09-2009 @ 9:28pm

I am constantly amazed that no matter what the topic or the author's use of a moral argument, the usual response from many posters reflects attitudes which just do not square with what Jesus would want from His followers. I find it grotesque that their hardheartedness toward their less fortunate brothers and sisters is often justified by distortion of Our Lord's message.

by: DRJ

09-09-2009 @ 9:28pm

I am constantly amazed that no matter what the topic or the author's use of a moral argument, the usual response from many posters reflects attitudes which just do not square with what Jesus would want from His followers. I find it grotesque that their hardheartedness toward their less fortunate brothers and sisters is often justified by distortion of Our Lord's message.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 9:53pm

How does it not square? You cannot make an accusation w/o addressing the specific arguments I and others have made.

I find no biblical or Christian justification for doing social justice by committing other injustices such as theft or slavery.

by: xfree9

09-09-2009 @ 9:53pm

How does it not square? You cannot make an accusation w/o addressing the specific arguments I and others have made.

I find no biblical or Christian justification for doing social justice by committing other injustices such as theft or slavery.

by: Bungarra

09-10-2009 @ 12:08pm

As an observer of this controversy, "socialism' is often referred to as something to be avoided. Is this the so-called 'socialism' of a Cuba or North Korea, or the approach taken by the Nordic countries such as Sweden? Not the same animal!

As I have suggested before, copying the Japanese will halve your costs and reduce the trauma of sickness on your poor. There will be an increase in life expectancy which is a reasonable measure of success of health policies.

by: Bungarra

09-10-2009 @ 12:08pm

As an observer of this controversy, "socialism' is often referred to as something to be avoided. Is this the so-called 'socialism' of a Cuba or North Korea, or the approach taken by the Nordic countries such as Sweden? Not the same animal!

As I have suggested before, copying the Japanese will halve your costs and reduce the trauma of sickness on your poor. There will be an increase in life expectancy which is a reasonable measure of success of health policies.

by: xfree9

09-10-2009 @ 10:35pm

Whether we call it socialism or not, a centrally-planned or centrally-controlled economy or society is not ideal nor is it ethical. Rule of law is necessary to "keep the peace," so to speak, so if there must be government, it is to keep people from violating each other's rights to freedom of choice and purposeful behavior.

So the difference between the "bad socialism" and what some call the "good socialism" is merely a matter of the lesser of two "evils." What should matter is that we stand for what is the best, not simply what might look or appear to be better. There are so many things we can imitate from other countries. Central command from the top is not one of them.

by: xfree9

09-10-2009 @ 10:35pm

Whether we call it socialism or not, a centrally-planned or centrally-controlled economy or society is not ideal nor is it ethical. Rule of law is necessary to "keep the peace," so to speak, so if there must be government, it is to keep people from violating each other's rights to freedom of choice and purposeful behavior.

So the difference between the "bad socialism" and what some call the "good socialism" is merely a matter of the lesser of two "evils." What should matter is that we stand for what is the best, not simply what might look or appear to be better. There are so many things we can imitate from other countries. Central command from the top is not one of them.

by: jdquest

09-11-2009 @ 1:06am

It does make ou suspicious of just who is posting comments here.

by: jdquest

09-11-2009 @ 1:06am

It does make ou suspicious of just who is posting comments here.

by: Bungarra

09-11-2009 @ 1:34am

G'day
A few random thoughts.
I am glad some one took up the comment. While Australians have a reasonable
good knowledge of the US - 93% of our media is dominated by your stuff, (and
during the negotiations of the free trade agreement, your media objected to
us requiring some Australian content on TV/Radio) some of the fine details
escape us. That is even for a person like me who has 6 generations of
American heritage on my mother's side.
From the tone of some what we see, what Americans call 'left' can be just
right of center for us, and the word socialism seems to translate
interchangeable with Stalinist Communism.
In the US, the word socialism seems to have considerably different overtones
than it does in Australia. Here there is a strong component of the concept
of The Public Good. Ie services which are good for the community, so the
value of which cannot be captured by any particular suppler to fund that
service are funded by the public purse. I guess defence is one such good,
proper management of the environment, or food and drug standards are others.
However the use of pork barrelling to ensure politic benefits for some areas
breaks down that 'public good' issue.
Also have a look at the Australian concept of "Mateship" and 'fair go'.
I was in India a few weeks ago, the traffic is horrible, westerners do not
even think about driving. The death rate on the roads is 30 times that of
Australia per mile travelled. The enforcement of good road rules/vehicle
safety etc is a neglected public good there. Returning via SW China (to see
where I was born) it is a piece of cake in comparison.
My wife is setting up a slum project in Calcutta for widows/children. One
woman in the group was killed a couple of weeks ago. She was going to
relive herself behind a shipping container, got the Ok to go, and they
dropped a container on her. Life is cheap.
There are issues of the low tax versus high tax approach which was
Ragenomics or the British version of the disease. The chooks are coming
home to roost on some of that - (chooks - Australian slang for chickens).
There are many problems with those privatized services in many parts of the
world in the maintenance of the service at a cost/convenience that was
possible under the 'inefficient public' service before.
Your comments are interesting, but I would beg to differ. We do not live on
a continually expanding frontier in a self sufficit situation. That has
closed. We depend on the social cohesion of the social network which is
currently most often the nation state, for our security and well being.
Case in point Somalia.
The fruits of the civilization depend on a cooperative social organisation,
not might is right. Likewise, to say that the fruits of my labour are not
dependant on others contribution is incorrect. So we have obligations to
others. Just try to organise your self in the Australian outback alone with
out support. You would be back to the Stone Age and depending on the good
will of the local group to survive.
It is considered to be an American heresy the over emphasise on the primacy
of personal rights over to the level that there is a denial of the
obligations of the citizens to a social network.
Likewise we need control of the warlords, be it the afghan model or the
Monsanto's of the world. I have observed some multinationals in action and
there is a push to maintain market share by all means including war. Have a
look at the history of the Nation Fruit company in Central America.
A company I worked for fought an action to prevent Monsanto from succeeding
with a request for anti dumping duties on Chinese chemical. That would have
increased costs to our farmers who are suffering from US and EU subsidies
which significantly depress the world price of wheat etc.
Yes, I am in the process of retiring, and have just taken a large hit in my
superannuation due to US carelessness in managing its economy. The Chinese
would have shot a few bankers by now.
Re health care, we are not perfect, but there is a safety net for all, few
go bankrupt though illness, you have your choices of doctors etc, and you
have the option of personal insurance for extras.
Yes our life expectancy ranks only 10th, not higher due in part to the
shameful situation re the Aboriginal in this country.
The question I ask is why the US is not doing better re health. You spend
at least twice as much as we do, or Japan (number 1) does. Possibly like
us, you have allowed the lawyers to take too much out of the system through
over servicing/higher insurance to prevent/cope with any litigation.
Interestingly, NZ has a public system which deals with accidents etc which
has a set pension /compensation where there are problems resulting in long
term damage and has taken that issue out of the courts.
Occasionally our governments get some viruses from your lobbyists and want
to muck up a functioning system in the interest of private choice. That
usually is code for rationing and reduced public spending. They tend to get
hammered at the next election when the emperor is shown to have no clothes.
This does not only apply to health, there have been attempts on public
education as well.
One other issue is the excessive price the US pays for drugs. Carefully
examine your IP laws and reduce the barriers for entry of overseas generic
drugs with out reducing standards. To have 2 lobbyists for pharmaceutical
companies per congress person is a good indication of over kill.
The EU is currently taking a few companies to court re market collusion - re
about 4-5 bill. We have the same problems here of attempts of market
corruption and undue influence of the regulators.
Yet I do not think I delusional about socialism etc. I watched the Red Army
victory parade in Shanghai, have followed the CIM/OMF reports over the
years, and have had many dealings with refugees starting with listening to
stories from White Russians in China. Yet the hard nosed private good at all
costs does not wash with me as well.
Any dictatorship be it commercial supported by corrupted IP laws, have huge
funds to corrupt laws, or a political situation, rule of drug lords etc is
not good or an imperial attitude in a Church. Consider the ".. eye for eye
and tooth for tooth.." can be abused, yet is very very democratic in
concept. We all have equal rights before the law etc independent of our
abilities to hire lawyers, bribe, be a member of the party or not etc.
Interesting, just what are the rights of a non person eg a company?
Private enterprise with a social face to soften/moderate the exesses is the
path I would suggest. Did not you break up some monoplies in the 1890's to
imporve the common good?

Thanks for you comments.

Bit difficult, but if we are nearby, we should share coffee some time.

Cheers

John Holmes
46 Gallagher St, Eden Hill, 6054
Ph (08) 9377 0607
Mob 0400 185 458
Email homesjc@iprimus.com.au

by: Bungarra

09-11-2009 @ 1:34am

G'day
A few random thoughts.
I am glad some one took up the comment. While Australians have a reasonable
good knowledge of the US - 93% of our media is dominated by your stuff, (and
during the negotiations of the free trade agreement, your media objected to
us requiring some Australian content on TV/Radio) some of the fine details
escape us. That is even for a person like me who has 6 generations of
American heritage on my mother's side.
From the tone of some what we see, what Americans call 'left' can be just
right of center for us, and the word socialism seems to translate
interchangeable with Stalinist Communism.
In the US, the word socialism seems to have considerably different overtones
than it does in Australia. Here there is a strong component of the concept
of The Public Good. Ie services which are good for the community, so the
value of which cannot be captured by any particular suppler to fund that
service are funded by the public purse. I guess defence is one such good,
proper management of the environment, or food and drug standards are others.
However the use of pork barrelling to ensure politic benefits for some areas
breaks down that 'public good' issue.
Also have a look at the Australian concept of "Mateship" and 'fair go'.
I was in India a few weeks ago, the traffic is horrible, westerners do not
even think about driving. The death rate on the roads is 30 times that of
Australia per mile travelled. The enforcement of good road rules/vehicle
safety etc is a neglected public good there. Returning via SW China (to see
where I was born) it is a piece of cake in comparison.
My wife is setting up a slum project in Calcutta for widows/children. One
woman in the group was killed a couple of weeks ago. She was going to
relive herself behind a shipping container, got the Ok to go, and they
dropped a container on her. Life is cheap.
There are issues of the low tax versus high tax approach which was
Ragenomics or the British version of the disease. The chooks are coming
home to roost on some of that - (chooks - Australian slang for chickens).
There are many problems with those privatized services in many parts of the
world in the maintenance of the service at a cost/convenience that was
possible under the 'inefficient public' service before.
Your comments are interesting, but I would beg to differ. We do not live on
a continually expanding frontier in a self sufficit situation. That has
closed. We depend on the social cohesion of the social network which is
currently most often the nation state, for our security and well being.
Case in point Somalia.
The fruits of the civilization depend on a cooperative social organisation,
not might is right. Likewise, to say that the fruits of my labour are not
dependant on others contribution is incorrect. So we have obligations to
others. Just try to organise your self in the Australian outback alone with
out support. You would be back to the Stone Age and depending on the good
will of the local group to survive.
It is considered to be an American heresy the over emphasise on the primacy
of personal rights over to the level that there is a denial of the
obligations of the citizens to a social network.
Likewise we need control of the warlords, be it the afghan model or the
Monsanto's of the world. I have observed some multinationals in action and
there is a push to maintain market share by all means including war. Have a
look at the history of the Nation Fruit company in Central America.
A company I worked for fought an action to prevent Monsanto from succeeding
with a request for anti dumping duties on Chinese chemical. That would have
increased costs to our farmers who are suffering from US and EU subsidies
which significantly depress the world price of wheat etc.
Yes, I am in the process of retiring, and have just taken a large hit in my
superannuation due to US carelessness in managing its economy. The Chinese
would have shot a few bankers by now.
Re health care, we are not perfect, but there is a safety net for all, few
go bankrupt though illness, you have your choices of doctors etc, and you
have the option of personal insurance for extras.
Yes our life expectancy ranks only 10th, not higher due in part to the
shameful situation re the Aboriginal in this country.
The question I ask is why the US is not doing better re health. You spend
at least twice as much as we do, or Japan (number 1) does. Possibly like
us, you have allowed the lawyers to take too much out of the system through
over servicing/higher insurance to prevent/cope with any litigation.
Interestingly, NZ has a public system which deals with accidents etc which
has a set pension /compensation where there are problems resulting in long
term damage and has taken that issue out of the courts.
Occasionally our governments get some viruses from your lobbyists and want
to muck up a functioning system in the interest of private choice. That
usually is code for rationing and reduced public spending. They tend to get
hammered at the next election when the emperor is shown to have no clothes.
This does not only apply to health, there have been attempts on public
education as well.
One other issue is the excessive price the US pays for drugs. Carefully
examine your IP laws and reduce the barriers for entry of overseas generic
drugs with out reducing standards. To have 2 lobbyists for pharmaceutical
companies per congress person is a good indication of over kill.
The EU is currently taking a few companies to court re market collusion - re
about 4-5 bill. We have the same problems here of attempts of market
corruption and undue influence of the regulators.
Yet I do not think I delusional about socialism etc. I watched the Red Army
victory parade in Shanghai, have followed the CIM/OMF reports over the
years, and have had many dealings with refugees starting with listening to
stories from White Russians in China. Yet the hard nosed private good at all
costs does not wash with me as well.
Any dictatorship be it commercial supported by corrupted IP laws, have huge
funds to corrupt laws, or a political situation, rule of drug lords etc is
not good or an imperial attitude in a Church. Consider the ".. eye for eye
and tooth for tooth.." can be abused, yet is very very democratic in
concept. We all have equal rights before the law etc independent of our
abilities to hire lawyers, bribe, be a member of the party or not etc.
Interesting, just what are the rights of a non person eg a company?
Private enterprise with a social face to soften/moderate the exesses is the
path I would suggest. Did not you break up some monoplies in the 1890's to
imporve the common good?

Thanks for you comments.

Bit difficult, but if we are nearby, we should share coffee some time.

Cheers

John Holmes
46 Gallagher St, Eden Hill, 6054
Ph (08) 9377 0607
Mob 0400 185 458
Email homesjc@iprimus.com.au

by: AnnaKSimon

09-21-2009 @ 8:15pm

Apart from its blessed location at the tip of Limmat River, the city has some of breathtakingly wonderful attractions that include switzerland clothing Gothic Fraumunster, the Church of Our Lady, the Fluntern Cemetery where the soul of famous Irish writer James Joyce rests in peace.

by: AnnaKSimon

09-21-2009 @ 8:15pm

Apart from its blessed location at the tip of Limmat River, the city has some of breathtakingly wonderful attractions that include switzerland clothing Gothic Fraumunster, the Church of Our Lady, the Fluntern Cemetery where the soul of famous Irish writer James Joyce rests in peace.

by: pharmajobs

12-09-2009 @ 10:27am

The three keys to health care reform is very nice. Thanks for sharing it.

by: pharmajobs

12-09-2009 @ 10:27am

The three keys to health care reform is very nice. Thanks for sharing it.