A Dog's Life and Health Care



If you were told that your pet spaniel needed an operation to correct a badly damaged rear leg, and that operation would cost you $126 would you spend the money?   What if the choices involved were fixing the leg for that price, amputating the leg for $75, or doing nothing and letting the dog live in lame and painful conditions, or euthanizing the dog for $25?  Obviously, your choices would be dictated by three conflicting considerations: affection for the dog, compassion for his pain and the realities of your budget. 
            Now, suppose that the cost of repairing the leg was not $126, but $65,646.  In a way, this decision is easier, isn’t it?  That amount of money represents such an obvious difference in choices for the family that, while you may not want your dog to suffer, you know that you are going to make a hard choice that does NOT include repairing the leg.  That choice has priced itself out of the equation.  Like it or not, a second option is going to be your only option. 
            The realities of the budget are not inconsiderable.  Nor are they free from emotional investment.  Spending in one are means deprivation in another.  Imagine telling your children that the you will send the oldest to an expensive and prestigious college, because they are extremely intelligent, but the rest of the children will have to finance their own education because the entire education budget has been spent.  There isn’t enough money to go around.  Your decision may be defensible, but that doesn’t mean it won’t be painful.  That doesn’t mean it won’t have repercussions.  And it doesn’t mean you won’t regret your choice somewhere down the line.   
We are now facing that same problem with health care in this country. 
The numbers I used in my analogy of an injured pet are the numbers that accurately reflect the cost of health care changes in the United States.  In 1962 the United States started tracking the amount of money the federal government was spending on health care.  In that year we spend $2.3 Billion, which was only 2.1% of the budget.  The $126 represents 2.1% of the median income in that year.  The $65,646 represents the increase of 521 times (!!!) that has occurred in our health care costs in just 55 years.  The money that our present Congress is talking about is now $1.2 Trillion and represents 31% of our budget.   We are now spending almost 1/3 of the federal budget providing health care.   That is twice as much as defense spending and even beats social security outlays. 
Have people become that much sicker in the space of my adulthood? No.  They have gotten older.  Half of all medical spending goes to those 55 and older, though they represent on one quarter of the population.  This is only going to get worse.  We have also expanded what we, as a society, define as the “right” of health care.  Does everyone deserve emergency room services?  That sounds like an easy “yes.”  Does everyone deserve a free breast augmentation, nose job or tummy tuck for strictly cosmetic reasons?  I would get an argument on saying that one is an easy “no.”  And don’t even get me started on fertility treatments for welfare recipients or sex changes for those who just can’t seem to play the hand they were dealt!
We need a discussion on health care that uses numbers instead of emotions.
Keep the faith. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Generation of Serfs

  On October 25, 1415, Henry V of England laid some serious hurt on the French at the Battle of Agincourt at Pas-de-Calais, France.   Part of the success of this campaign was due to Henry’s use of the longbow, but part of it also goes to the creative use of military indentures.   These legal contracts required all the English captains to provide specified amounts of men, material and time to the King’s cause.             An indenture was a document, written in duplicate and then torn along a jagged line, like little teeth ( dents ), in the paper.   One portion of the contract was in possession of each party and when the required conditions and period of service were fulfilled, the parts reunited, and the debt was considered paid.   Many of the people who first came to this country from England came as indentured servants, worked off their debt and became the backbone of the country.             Today we are creating a nation not of indentured servants, someone with a carefully
Read more

Our Beautiful Constitution and its Ugly Opponents

 The Constitution is our anchor of stability in a turbulent world!   We can withstand a bad President and a petulant Congress (for the short term, at least) because our Constitution both guides and limits.   If someone asked me to provide proof of a loving God, I would simply ask them how else so many geniuses in the matter of human governance could have been clustered together in the right time and place to create both our country and the means to govern it.    Our founding fathers had the vision to devise a way to not only govern themselves, but govern a country that they could not imagine, yet believed would prevail. The constitution of the United States is like a good parent.   It has allowed us to grow up as we have grown older, with the result that the United States of America is the oldest living democracy in the world.   The miracle of this document is that it lives, breathes and moves with the times.   The three branches of our government work together while standing alone
Read more

"You Didn't Build That:" Part I

Late in the day on Friday, July 13 th , President Obama mounted the stage of Historic Firehouse Number One in Roanoke , Virginia .   The room held around 800 people but it was hot and several people fainted.   In front of a carefully screened group of supporters he gave one of the most important speeches of his reelection campaign.    It was not meant to be a major speech.   That will come in the even more carefully scripted Convention Hall in Charlotte , North Carolina this September in front of adoring media and rabid political supporters.   But this speech in Roanoke is crucial to the 2012 election because on Friday, in Virginia , President Obama went off message.   Whether through error or hubris, he abandoned his script and spoke off the cuff.   And in so doing, he showed us the man behind the curtain.   The angry but controlled, insecure yet charismatic, market fearful, socialistically inclined man that Barrack Obama really is. I am speaking, of course, of the now famou
Read more