Two arguments for a socialized health care system

First, we already have a socialized educational system. There are public schools financed by the government and there are private schools that are non-profit or for profit organizations. It does not seem as though the quality of our private school system has suffered because of the existence of our public school (socialized) system. There are many outstanding Universities in the private university system, Stanford, USC, Michigan, to name a few. There are outstanding high schools and outstanding private schools (like the one the Obama children attend). The reason for the public schools system is to provide access to education for every American, child or adult. Some say that our university system and community college system are the best in the world. The competition between the private sector and public sector seem to produce a good product not a lessor product. So now, what do we say is more important, education or health? Do we say to our children, "Well, I know your sick, you are vomiting and you have a fever of 105 (f) but you know your education is more important that your health so I am sending you to school anyway?" Of course we don't. We take them to the doctor. We wait until they are healthy again and then we send them back to school. Health is more important than education. It is more important than making money. In fact, a society based on the health of every individual would be the best kind of society. Our society today is structured around its individual members being sick. Our fatty food diet is designed to make us sick and to keep us sick. It is designed to keep doctors and nurses and other heath care givers in high demand and at high salaries. It is designed to keep the medicine companies in the high profit categories. If you want to reverse this basis for America you will have to fight for it. Money is not easily given up in America. So, to go back to my analogy with the educational system. If we can make education accesible to everyone by a socialized process then why wouldn't we make health (which we know is more important to a society and individual than is education) accessible to every American? Reason would say we must. Polititcs says we should not or maybe. Will reason prevail? Have we arrived at the age of reason or is this the age of politics. Reason should drive our politics but it does not. Emotion drives our politics but it doesn't need to. Emotion is not necessary to politics it is adhoc to politics. When you have done the right thing, acted correctly, you feel good (like when medicare passed or when the civil rights bill passed). I don't see how any Republican or Democrat can feel good about not supporting a government funded (taxpayer funded) accessible health care system. Another argument I must deal with is the argument it is possible for the private sector to provide accessible (public) health care for everyone. Well if they could why haven't they done it yet? And if they haven't done it how can we trust that they will do it? The capitalistic basis for the health care system described above is profit. How will the profit motive all of a sudden change to a altruistic motive?

Second, Obama was too good of a salesman when he was running for President. He told us of a health care insurance that was paid for by the taxpayer. It is a government health insurance that pays to the health care of government employees (yes even the congressmen and congresswomen who oppose socialized health care!). Obama asked: Now why can't you taxpayers who pay for this insurance not be able to subscribe to it just like Joe and I do? Why indeed. We already pay for health insurance with our taxes so why shouldn't we be able to enjoy what we pay for? Fair enough. Why didn't someone tell us about this earlier? It all seem great. We elect Obama as president, we elect enough Democrats to support his efforts to get us this health insurance we already pay for. Good. Done. Well, not quite. We forgot that politicians can be bought, like any commodity (they should trade them on the stock exchange). So now the insurance companies own enough Congressmen and Congresswomen so that there is not enough votes for us to get the health insurance we already pay for. Now what do we do? We do what ever we need to do. We are fighting for our health and the health care for future generations. How important is that to you? One other argument that the opponents to heath care are using is the cost. We can spend billions on war and billions on the economy but we can't spend billions on our own heath? What lunacy is this? People are hocking their homes and life savings for health treatment and the government is worried about going into debt? We have been in debt before and we have always paid our debts. I don't think future generations will mind pay a debt for health care for war yes, they will curse Bush for many years to come. People are losing their lives because they have no insurance to pay for health care and the government is worried about money, money they have or can borrow? Is there any parent out there who would not beg borrow or steal to get there kids the health care they need? If there is anything worth getting into debt for it is heath care. As I said in the beginning it is the most important thing we have, our most prized possession. Don't you agree? Besides, Obama has explained that the very rich will pay for most of the health care for the poor. Justice. The poor and their labor is what make the rich so rich.