A letter from former Massachusetts Medicaid commissioner James J. Callahan Jr., in yesterday’s Globe:
AN INDIVIDUAL mandate for healthcare coverage is bad public policybecause it assumes that the provision of healthcare is an individual,not a social, responsibility.
Sound familiar? Read the whole thing.
And in response to Robert Kuttner’s column on GM’s new health-benefit-cutting deal with UAW, here’s another letter writer who wonders: "What is puzzling is why General Motors is not screaming for national health insurance."
Well… that’s a good question, but the question wishfully assumes a false choice: That GM would prefer to insure its workers through a more efficient government-based system — and therefore pay higher taxes — than through the wasteful system they’re paying for now. Sadly, there’s a third option: Neither. And that seems to be where we’re headed, unless and until the public gets sick of it and demands government action.
GM, Ford, Starbucks and other globally-threatened companies are not walking through that single-payer door, folks. They are captive to the same hit-the-numbers-this-quarter thinking as the rest of Wall Street, and they are not going to go to Washington to ask for their taxes to be raised — even if it’s in their long-term interests, even if it would keep their employees healthy and productive, even if it would take the burden of health care costs off of them. Right now, all they can think of is getting the monkey off their backs as soon as possible and showing Wall Street a nice shiny quarter.
Doesn’t Starbucks give health benefits to their part-time workers?
Yes, they do; my point is that they will feel the same pressure as the others as health care costs continue to spiral up. Costco, for instance, has been criticized by Wall Street analysts for being too generous with benefits.
I think you really hit the nail on the head there!
Health insurance is a major aspect to many lives and everyone deserves to be covered.