Wednesday, July 11, 2012

The Emperor's New Question: A Philosophical Look at Health Care


In my new weekly column for When Falls the Coliseum, I get to wear the disguise of "The Emperor of the World." As we all know, some disguises can be liberating; this one allows me to air out the saltier, less compassionate side of myself. (My wife thinks I am way too nice here on H&R; I tend to growl a bit more during our living room conversations about the world.) In the column, "The Emperor" makes a decree of some kind and then deals out punishment for transgressions. The punishments are always Dante-esque -- flavored with metaphoric meaning that is sometimes obvious and sometimes not.

Yesterday, my alter-ego made a decree that one is owed nothing as a result of his or her hard work.

When I posted a link for my Facebook friends, I captioned it with a reference to the Declaration of Independence, sort of mechanically. (I often write that way.)  Here's what I posted:

Okay, now the Emperor is mad. Stop yer whining and accept the fact that you deserve nothing but life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (Key word: "pursuit." If they had meant "attainment," believe me, they would have said that.)

After I wrote this, I sat back and said, "Hmpf." (I actually said that. I say that a lot.)

But isn't this interesting? It occurs to me that there may be a major misreading, in America, at least, of what the Founding Fathers envisioned for us, this seeing the word "pursuit" as "attainment."

Granted, this is a more philosophical than a political point (big surprise) but one can't help seeing the tie-in to certain issues on the political table in America, at least.

Well, philosophy and practicality are often at odds. This is one of the recurring and oft-lamented themes, here. This conflict does create the following conundrum, though:

Trumbull's famous painting.
Pursuit of happiness is a fundamental right of human beings, especially in a country that was founded on this idea. One cannot effectively pursue happiness if one is sick or dead; therefore, one must have health care in order to pursue happiness effectively. If one doesn't have this health care, one is being denied one of (potentially two of) the entitlements outlined in the Declaration.

If some don't have health care, are they being denied the rights outlined by the Founding Fathers? If they are being denied these rights, is it okay for the government to force other Americans to help those who are being denied these "inalienable" fundamental entitlements?

One hell of a question, for me -- especially as a guy who has a pretty radical personal sense of liberty when it comes to government involvement in his life.

I still think people in our country feel way too entitled. If you get cut from American Idol, it doesn't matter how hard you worked; you don't deserve to make the show, regardless of that work. But, are people entitled to health care at the expense of some of my freedom, based on my country's basic principals? Am I obligated to give a homeless man a meal? -- that old question.

The tunnel extends...

If you comment, and I hope you do, try not to talk about practical concerns, I'm not interested, for now, in why "Obamacare" will or will not "work"; I know there are a million arguments on either side. What I am interested in is what is fundamentally right or wrong.

You have to start from somewhere, don't you? Shouldn't it be from a question of ethics? -- then worry about the details as part of the plan of action?

8 comments:

  1. For me, it depends on WHAT is on the table as an "entitlement." Let's say--merely for the sake of argument, mind you--this is entirely wholly hypothetical--let's say a student, and his parents, feel "entitled" to a report card full of A's because that family is paying a hefty tuition at a private school. Let's say that if, GOD FORBID that student should happen to earn a grade LESS than an A...let's say that this family will march in en masse and demand countless meetings with the teacher and administration in never-ending attempts at stranguling, bullying, minutely-analyzing and all in all CRUCIFYING the teacher until that family manages to **SQUEEEEEEZE** that much desired "A" out of the teacher, whose innate tendency towards HONESTY caused him to award the grade that the student ACTUALLY EARNED.

    Is that a proper sense of entitlement? Now, laying that side by side with health care...the lack of a universal public health care system in the USA literally holds citizens hostage...to marriages they want out of, to jobs that torment them, to locations and situations that they would prefer not to be in. Yet they stay, because otherwise, they'd be uninsured.

    This is not freedom. This is SLAVERY to a deeply flawed system.

    Do I feel "entitled" to universal Medicare? YOU BET I DO. Do I think that every tuition-paying "entitled" student "deserves" an A? Nope. Health care is a NECESSITY. An unearned "A" for self-aggrandizement purposes, is not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous -- that was pretty much my point:

      "I still think people in our country feel way too entitled. If you get cut from American Idol, it doesn't matter how hard you worked; you don't deserve to make the show, regardless of that work. But, are people entitled to health care at the expense of some of my freedom, based on my country's basic principals? Am I obligated to give a homeless man a meal? -- that old question."

      Also see:

      "Pursuit of happiness is a fundamental right of human beings, especially in a country that was founded on this idea. One cannot effectively pursue happiness if one is sick or dead; therefore, one must have health care in order to pursue happiness effectively. If one doesn't have this health care, one is being denied one of (potentially two of) the entitlements outlined in the Declaration."


      If you get a chance, read my "Emperor's" post, too.

      Delete
  2. Oh Emperor Chris, Grand Poobah of the Hats and Rabbits, and Lord High Everything Else:

    Do you really think we can have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without health (and therefore, health care?)

    I ask because I'm curious, and because for me the answer is "absolutely not."

    I know you said you weren't interested in the practical implications, and I certainly can't venture an informed opinion about whether the Affordable Care Act, as written, will actually work, but here are two things to consider:

    1. Lack of healthcare stifles entrepreneurship, because small business owners typically cannot afford full coverage for their employees, or even coverage for their employees at all.

    2. Lack of healthcare reduces labour mobility because people stay in jobs for the health care.

    How many people are trapped in dead-end jobs, in dead-end towns, because they need the health insurance, and are therefore not at liberty to pursue happiness? How many dreams are deferred?

    If the argument is predicated on liberty and the pursuit of happiness being fundamentally good, then surely denying people those good things because they are stuck trying to maintain the "life" part is fundamentally not good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Lord High Everything Else"! I like that!

      Yes, 'nora -- I take it as a given that health is a necessary component for pursuit of happiness; hence:

      "One cannot effectively pursue happiness if one is sick or dead; therefore, one must have health care in order to pursue happiness effectively. If one doesn't have this health care, one is being denied one of (potentially two of) the entitlements outlined in the Declaration."

      My only question rests in the obligation of American citizens regarding assuring such healthcare -- the obligations involved, which brings us back to some age-old philosophical models regarding stewardship of each other...

      Delete
    2. Credit Gilbert & Sullivan for the "Lord High Everything Else" title -- it's from the Mikado. I've always liked it.

      And yes, I know you do believe that. That's the problem with trying to write comments on your lunch break. The rough edges don't always get sanded off.

      As for obligation, yes, I think so. Or at least we are obliged to assure access to that healthcare, in the same way we assure access to basic education. What the individual chooses to do with that access is another story.

      I know you are often critical of "society" and "community" as promoting "group-think" and sometimes I even think you're right about that, but if we're going to talk about "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," then I think we ought also to consider "We the People." The social contract matters; we don't get to live our lives in freedom without supporting the system that allows everyone to do it, and if we try, we should not be surprised when the system collapses. Or, as Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, once wrote, "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society."

      Delete
    3. I think, in the end, we are in complete agreement. The Emperor approves.

      Delete
  3. Is there too prevalent a sense of "entitlement" in American society at present? No question--there really is and it's a poison. It's 'consumer choice' writ large...as if having the "choice" among 17 different kinds of laundry detergent really mattered...we could have three different ones and it would serve the purpose just as well. Whoever came up with this idea of rewarding ALL the kids who participate in a sports or any other kind of program...so everyone goes home with a trophy? Not good. Their hearts were in the right place, but they didn't think that one through. As a result, we have now a couple of generations of people who never developed the coping techniques they need for REAL LIFE.

    If everyone is a 'winner,' then achievement, real achievement, really means nothing. Not everyone wins all the time; not everyone gets what they want, all the time.

    I still remember a couple of spectacularly upsetting, huge failures from middle school. Eventually I went on to achieve much bigger and better things, but learning that necessary lesson of "Sometimes you DON'T get what you want...and YOU SURVIVED ANYWAY..." was an invaluable lesson to have learned at a relatively young age.

    Failure helps you develop the essential callouses you need on your feet so the thorns and brambles of the rest of your life don't cripple you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree on every point, anonymous. While I think "participation trophies" are great for the littlest ones -- maybe at the age of five -- is needs to stop after that. Losing builds character, for sure; therefore, I have lots of character.

      Delete