Some countries have privatized health insurance for their health care. Others have a public option. Which do you prefer?
Share why if you wish.
Category: Money
Is Everything Broken?
Looking around at all the failing institutions and organizations that surround us, it is easy to ask the question: Is everything broken?
The government seems broken. The current U.S. administration seems intent on dismantling many departments. However, even before that, the legislative body was so deeply divided that new laws rarely got passed. Additionally, the judicial branch is rife with corruption.
Education seems broken. Teachers’ salaries are not competitive with other, non-teaching jobs. Many schools are underfunded, and are overburdened with numerous requirements. Educational outcomes are declining.
Health care seems broken. A family can go bankrupt if one person gets sick. Medical knowledge and technology has never been better, and yet not everyone has equal access to it.
The media seems broken. Due to mergers and bankruptcies, media outlets are concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. The Internet has disrupted traditional delivery and funding methods, which has left newsrooms slashed. In some cases, misinformation and clickbait have replaced actual reporting.
The climate seems broken. Storms are more powerful, droughts more severe, floods are more frequent, and so on. Events that happened once a century now happen once a decade, leading to greater damage and more deaths.
The list goes on and on. Wealth disparity, racial relations, ecosystem collapse, cultural loneliness, immigration, overdose deaths, housing, and more. Systems are increasingly hard to navigate, expensive, and ineffective.
Or is this merely pessimistic thinking? There have always been difficulties. Every generation has challenges to overcome: world wars, financial depressions, assassinations, disease outbreaks, natural disasters. Are things actually worse today than they were, say, 100 years ago? 500 years ago? 10,000?
What do you think? Is everything broken?
Related questions: What is the greatest problem facing humanity? Will the future be better than the present? Why do we put up with unhappiness? Is it a cruel world?
Is Health Care A Human Right?
Health care is something that every person has experience with. Is that enough to make it a fundamental human right?
At various times throughout our lives, we need medical attention. That might come from a broken bone, a common illness, or even something more serious. It might mean visiting a doctor, or perhaps even a stay in the hospital.
In fact, this even predates hospitals. Tens of thousands of years ago, most if not all tribes of hunter gatherers, or early agricultural societies, probably had a shaman or medicine man. These people would fix broken legs, suggest herbs to numb pain or promote healing, and the like.
This universality in the need for medical attention might suggest a human right. Everyone will need some form of health care, regularly and throughout their entire lives. What could be more basic? Besides maybe air to breathe and water to drink?
And yet, that health care is provided by other humans. Doctors, nurses, porters, hospital administrators, technicians, and on and on. It requires drugs that are expensive to develop and produce, and ever-advancing equipment that can do remarkable things.
What happens if someone cannot pay for these goods and services? Should they be denied treatment that may extend their life? Or should they be treated, with the (potentially large) costs being passed on to the rest of us? Or perhaps the medical community should be required to provide these services at reduced or no cost?
Is health care a human right? If so, how do we pay for someone who cannot, themselves, provide payment? If not, how can we justify pain, suffering, and early or unnecessary death for the sake of money?
Related questions: What does it mean to be healthy? How do you stay healthy? What is the sickest you have ever been? Do animals have rights?
Should A Healthy Society Have Billionaires?
As of September 2024, there were 801 billionaires based in the United States with a combined wealth totaling $6.22 trillion. For comparison, in 2020, the U.S. had 614 billionaires with a combined wealth of $2.947 trillion. As a result, today’s billionaires control significantly more wealth than the bottom half of American families. And wealth disparities are only increasing.
Is this okay? Should a healthy society have such a thing as billionaires? Should wealth be capped — or, at least, should those making more than a billion dollars be taxed at much higher levels?
Defenders of a billionaires’ class assert that the wealthy — as innovators, risk-takers, and job creators — help drive a healthy American economy. While making money off their money, billionaires often retain only a fraction of the social benefits that accrue from their investments. Proponents of unchecked wealth say that any effort to impose income and wealth limits will dampen the desires of richest amongst us to contribute to the growth of our economy.
Another argument posits that billionaires donate significantly to charities — from homelessness programs to environmental causes to the arts — which benefit from individual gifts and foundations that support such causes.
However, not everyone agrees that unbridled income and wealth are good things. This camp believes that extreme wealth and income inequality are dangerous to democracy. For example, billionaires — like Elon Musk — have much greater access to political leaders and often contribute to candidates and causes that will help them become even more prosperous.
Another line of reasoning for limiting wealth maintains that billionaires invest heavily in financial interests that hurt the rest of society, from environmental damage to food insecurity to unfair market advantages.
Or, did you know that billionaires live, on average, a decade longer than the average person, and their older years also have nearly a decade more disability-free time than the rest of us? Of course, it must be noted that in general those who live in poverty and less prosperous communities live much shorter lives than those higher up the income scale. (This is known by some as “death by zip code.”) Supporters of greater income and wealth equality may ask if a “Billionaires’ Tax” could be used to help others enjoy the life- and comfort-span of the wealthy.
Of course, this post lists only a few reasons for each side of this debate. Do you have more to offer? Or how do you feel about the wealth and income divide? Should a healthy society have such things as billionaires?
Related questions: How much is enough? What is the purpose of money? Who has power? Does Universal Basic Income make sense?
What Do You Like Most About Your Job?
What are the most appealing parts of your job? Health insurance, salary, co-workers? Is it fulfilling? Something else?
Share why if you wish.