Op Ed: Capitalism, Driven By Profit Motive, Threatens Healthcare

One thing we know for sure re the capitalistic “market-miracle system” is that profit-pursuit drives policy and performance, with little regard for anything else --including human necessities. With costs considered as essential unavoidable negative consequence for any-and-all corporate decisions, do you really believe private-profit performance, pitted against any possible gain for patients --poor or otherwise-- will have any weight against dollar-balances?

With healthcare --or lack of it-- definitely shaping and very often determining essential ability to workand- earn, that heavy burden all too often forces reliance on the last resort --the “emergency room” --in too many hospitals. When in good health, nearly all of us can carry our own share of survival costs; and do so pretty well. Individual responsibility is an inbuilt American characteristic.

But when we are ill, sometimes desperately, that is no longer possible for most: A fact desperately meaningful for those supporting a family. Whether arrival there is now by last-choice via no doctor/access, or by ambulance-crew deposit after enforced (and costly) emergency-trip from home or street, today’s first-step for multiple millions is “Off we go to the hospital emergency room”.

WHERE else can anyone uncovered turn for succor and renewed hope, given probable recovery --too often contingent on rapid medical assistance? Where else do police, agency, friends and neighbors, or family members, send seriously stricken-ones, when that happens?

WHAT OTHER CHOICE is still left, for far too many now? Those deprived now more often than not were once competently covered by their employer’s sharing-plan. That was part of the decades-long pattern of the “American Dream” --won by long-and-hard negotiating effort, as part of an accepted “social contract”, put into place to substitute for true national responsibilities --as well understood at that time by all concerned.

The current continuing worldwide economic crisis, clearly caused by some of the same capitalistic system “cyclical vagaries” and violent “variations from normal”, is now widely seen --also worldwide !- as a major determining component for the possible very rude awakening from that Dream, now very clearly underway in our nation.

TO WHOM and HOW can the now-unemployed and otherwise unprotected turn in last resort? The current fiscal/financial and economic-system “cyclical conformation” has taught us --again!!-- the same painful lesson: Once we are forced beyond the ordinary limits of capitalism’s “cyclical nature”, NOBODY stands at the ready except our government.

In our 21st Century democratic society, proudly boasting of its Constitution providing “equal opportunity” for all, and its Bill of Rights building our international reputation for 250 years, is THAT observation currently the honestly-undeniable status? For more than FORTY/FIFTY MILLION residents of the “richest nation in the world”?

WHO then foots these extra-heavy dollar-draining demands to defeat, or even detour, that loss of working income for all three of the unavoidable involved-ones: Doctor, Patient and Hospital?

Surely it is evident where the healthcare money actually goes: Professionals serving the public at every level, led by hospital association efforts, have been warning us about“Health Care Costs: CRUCIAL PUBLIC ISSUE” ever since the middle-Seventies ! (See Reader’s Note.) Can YOU guess who gets to pay?

YOU do --ready-and-willing or NOT ! YOU didn’t choose to make it that way --OR did you? There HAVE BEEN past potent, even if precarious, opportunities to make sure “the healthcare system” was differently set up, organized and re-organized. The last-preceding strong drive --during the Clinton Administration-- was “killed a’borning” by the very same private-profit heavy-pursuers now practicing every possible subterfuge to “confuse the issue” once again.

WHERE were YOU then, and WHAT did you DO? OR NOT do? But today, faced by better-informed and by far more determined and defiant public opinion, they promise our new President they will do more-and-different -- given a full decade to do the damnably now-demanded: “NOW we WILL cut back on these dangerously escalating costs,” they promised; only to qualify, cut back, and considerably reduce commitment within 24 hours.

Does THAT, somehow explain a very large part of the rising crisis we now face for huge expenditures already proving untenable and unsustainable? It is undoubtedly true that some levels of some healthcare costs are truly unavoidable, must be accommodated, and demand probing, highly qualified medical judgment.

HOW ELSE can it ever be possible to manage massive demand and multiple new applications, as well as major developments in medicines and their prescription? The profession, at every level, continues to learn and also to grow --in both practitioners and patients, in hospitals and new facilities at formerly unknown levels,and by both personal demands and practical necessities. Would YOU wish it otherwise?

BUT you CAN --indeed, MUST! -- control what our elected representatives in a democratic republic, built on more than 250 years of pragmatic experience, can now DO for ALL of us, NOW we must assume our OWN Constitutional citizen responsibility to advise our representatives in making their fundamental choices for us.

That is how representative governance must work. What YOU tell your Representative or Senator can, should --and for this crucial decision MUST!- shape and guide what they do: Either for US or for other private interests.

If, indeed, that process is now distorted by multiple means, THEN we must surely undertake remedy for that deeply desperate anomaly we have continued to allow for far too long. But that is tomorrow’s duty. Today it is your duty to learn, understand and then choose which approach we must now take to provide healthcare as an individual right due each and every one born-American.

Let your voice be heard --in Washington, rapidly, insistently. in chorus with millions of others like YOU. John Dewey long contended “Conversation is the heart of democracy”; many events in our history have proven the wisdom of that statement. Tell ‘em “back there” how it really is “out here” -- and what they MUST now DO for us all.

Reader’s Note:
Part Two upcoming will analyze major provisions of the three main healthcare reform programs now under crucial study by Congress and public opinion. Healthcare professionals warned of rapidly-rising healthcare costs in the early ‘70s. It was our pleasure at LMA-Chicago to help plan, produce, and market, for the then-Hospital Financial Management Association, an 80-color/graphic slide program driven by tape cassette, widely utilized by multiple hundreds of hospitals nationwide. That program was titled as shown above --surely a forerunner then of the developing situation now finally recognized by pending Congressional reform of our healthcare system, so tragically failing so many millions.

He joined Dr. Amo DeBernardis at PCC, helping establish, extend programs, facilities, Oregon/national public relations; moved to Chicago as Editor/Publisher of oldest educational-AV journal, reformed as AV GUIDE Magazine; then established and operated Learning Media Associates as general communications consultant group. Due to wife’s illness, he returned to Oregon in 1981, semi-retired, and has continued writing intermittently ever since, joining S-N in 2004. His Op Eds now total over 560 written since then.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Phil May 20, 2009 7:57 am (Pacific time)

In terms of massive government spending California is the "canary in the mine" so to speak. If you assess the so-called progressive states like New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Massachussetts, Vermont, California, and of course Oregon, they all have high taxes and user fees in common. They also have the highest unemployment rates. When you compare the above states with say Texas and Utah, the two latter states have low tax rates and low unemployment rates. Cutting budgets will generate some hardship in the short run, but in the long term it may bring some economic healing to these progressive states. To add further taxes and user fees, on either a state and/or federal level will only worsen their current situation. Will they cut their budgets? Unlikely. With the Fed printing all this money there will come a time that inflation will set in. We may even rebound for a while, but it will be a bubble, it will pop, and a new deepening recession will happen in my opinion.

Henry Ruark May 19, 2009 3:48 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Several of my other-channel "friends" are querying me re documenting sources named here, honestly listed. For the record, LMA-Chicago was communications consulting operation with some 40 other intermittently assigned colleagues chosen for special expertise, skills, sources, compiled over ten previous years in other assignments. For LMA standard report, we often cited 100/125 references including bibliography, media, books, firms, persons, agency addresses, etc. My role was to assign, summarize, edit AND deliver. This is duck soup compared to what we had to do then to compete in tough Chicago deal.

Henry Ruark May 19, 2009 8:34 am (Pacific time)

JBP: Appreciate your personal ID and your good sources, and will check still further beyond what already carried out for this series. Despite rigidities in some current systems, inevitable lifestyle and economic changes force us to forge something new to fit our own rapidly changing, different needs; perhaps by combined-approach aleady under consideration. It is still inevitably true that for most persons, in most present situations, we are now outrun in many components of quality care for all. We stand 30th in life extension, as one consequence. No other modern nation has nearly 50 MILLION UNCOVERED. That's the fact, however unpalatable it may be. Many Americans now must choose to eat OR "see the doctor" OR skip essential meds; OR risk consequences of health neglected. Even many families at $75,000 income level are cutting back due to rising cost-squeeze. That, too, is fact, not fancy. When Sunday-edition magazine leads with deeply significant reportss from wide variety of specialist agency leaders, it is unique proof of pressing interest via honest, heavy public opinion. This is definitely NOT an example of "mass hysteria". opinion.

J B Portsmith May 19, 2009 7:34 am (Pacific time)

I am a retired Clinical health care worker , who also travels and gives Medical Seminars throughout North America. I distinctly remember a close friend whose Father, an Anaesthesiologist, moved to the United States from Great Britain. The primary reason was the dichotomy in health care delivery between the Government system and the private system. As I remember his comments, the Government run healthcare system involved significant rationing of services, delays in care independent of medical needs, and delivery of care based on economic rationing algorithms separate and distinct from any rational or compassionate medical care decision making. The "Private" system was available primarily to the government employees and the wealthy, although not advertised widely as such. If you would like an updated perspective on the Canadian system, then google Don Neufeldt for an eye opening look at that failing system.

Henry Ruark May 18, 2009 6:06 pm (Pacific time)

Charles: We fought a bloody Civil War re essential part of what the Constitution doth allow, with Congress making the decisions. Don't you think it is about time "the richest country in the world" lived up to what we have peddled all those many decades ? More rights are on the way, some after more than 200 years of struggle, with countless solid experience to build open,angry public demand precisely the opposite to what you profess. We waste on countless public entertainment, seeking same dollar-profit, ten times what all those rights totalled will ever cost. Given informed, responsible citizens, would that continue ? Some wish to have it so;are you one such ? We can provide the "freedom" for that choice, given the same essential responsibility to all our citizens to also provide what they must now have to continue civilized existence in a real America, and compete with other nations now outrunning us in many ways --including healthcare, education, literacy, and life expectancy.(Documented, too !) Re "rights" for the 21st Century, and re private-profit prosperity,seek out solid fact on realities today in national and international journals far more respectable on the record with reports and authoritative expert opinion than single- name non-backgrounded "masked man" voicing ONLY personal interpretation, with no links to any form of documentation. IF you ID to Editor, will send you for free (one-time only !) LMA report for first Op Ed with more than 40 sources, including six issues of TIME, ten other national magazines, some 20 Internet special reports, and other assorted items, drawn from 40 years of writer's file, as well as ongoing surveillance of all possible accessible sources. When we say "informed opinion" at S-N, we really, honestly,openly,democratically mean precisely that. What do you offer in retort as documentation beyond your own uninformed opinion ?

Henry Ruark May 18, 2009 12:46 pm (Pacific time)

Charles: You are both Uninformed and badly Misinformed, sir. Most damaging is your personal political interpretation of Constitutional content, flying in face of nationally-accepted ybderstandings firmly in place by protocol and proceedings. Per usual diatribe built on 40 years of obfuscation and denial of realities, you mouth and mirron Far Right/neocon nonentities, denied by full public record. Example: Yrs re deregulation is off by more than twenty years and multiple massive impacts, as well as flatout fallacy banks required to give credit to unworthy. That's wellknown political-pander from GOP noise machine, since there's no legal way it can be accomplished. Policy is still another point, always open to Congressional action, heart and soul of representative form of governance. For reality facts re full impacts on healthcare already in detailed publc record, see opcoming Op Eds completing my 3-part series just started. For preview of distressing components of national healthcare realities, see PARADE Magazine from Sunday editions of responsible daily newspapers. It mirrors mine, albeit not seen by me until Monday after Op Ed published. If you can provide "see with own eyes" links to impartial, nonpartisan sources for any of your wildly erratic rant, do so here rapidly for all to see. We welcome dissent at any time, but irresponsible repeat of already-rebutted irrational attacks based on denial of practical reality is abuse of our open, democratic AND honest S-N channel.

Charles May 18, 2009 12:44 pm (Pacific time)

Tim King are you suggesting that the U.S. Constitution provides for national health care? It does not. We are currently saddled with a soon to be bankrupt social security and medicare system. We do not even have the funding to deal with those two situations. So to pile on another unfunded mandate like national health care will be that proverbial straw for our economy. I am certainly no fan of Bush, and would like to see him in prison, but for probably different reasons than you, except that nearly 8 out of 10 Americans agree with me in terms of what he and congress failed to do. I would like to see someone point out some other country that has government run health care and demonstrate why it is superior to what we currently have. I do feel that those who do not have the ability to pay for their health care, especially children, should receive a hand until they are able to secure their own private insurance. But why not start with a health care policy that truely funds our veterans needs and see how that works, and if it does we have somewhat of a model to extrapolate on. Please recall the Stimulus Bill and how important it was to get passed quickly that not one person in congress read the bill. They want to do the same thing with health care. It is a noble thing to want every one to have health care, but we simply do not have the resources, and that includes having enough doctors, nurses and other workers. That means the waiting period for health care will get longer and longer, as it does in other countries. I hope I am wrong in my analysis, but I'm not. If the cap and trade passes, expect your entire way of life to turn upside down, unless you are completely self-sufficent and off the grid.

Tim King: Don't get me wrong Charles, I think we're going to have our asses handed to us in a handbasket. I've known since the time the Supreme Court elected George W. Bush, that we were totally and completely in for it. This country allowed things under his watch to go so far out of control; the budget went from being balanced to shooting so astronomically high that we can't even tally it up. What comes after a trillion anyway? I just know that in the meanwhile, for all of whatever faults he brings to the table, we did an amazing thing by electing the most opposite figure we could have ever found, and he's a brother. Who would have ever thought? I lack faith in things and I admit that, but the notion that we have an African American President brings a level and type of redemption that nothing else could touch. Having said all of that, I'm sure there probably isn't enough money to fund national healthcare, not after Iraq, but why not stand behind the President on a thing or two? It was unpatriotic to not support the slaughter of Iraqi's if anyone recalls, and that was BS. I think patriotism does exist though in backing the guy who won the vote. Thanks for your response.

Anonymous May 18, 2009 11:57 am (Pacific time)

Tim King: please try to back off. The commenter mentioned nothing about Bush or his war. Let's stay on topic. Also, realize that, just because we have a "two party system" does NOT mean that the commenter is on the "other team." You two may very well agree on more issues than you think. Your polarizing rebuttal to a well thought-out comment is not constructive.

Tim King: Are you really suggesting how the editor of this site should conduct business? You think we're not going to put things into perspective? We needed healthcare years ago and the last president only wanted to murder Iraqi citizens. I appreciate that you are trying to keep things on topic, and I believe that I was very much on topic. Thanks for your comment. "Back off" is way too much by the way, OK? Seriously.

Charles May 18, 2009 8:51 am (Pacific time)

The Constitution lays out that the individual has the natural right to pursue Life, Liberty and Happiness. National health care is not your right, nor is it the responsibility for any of us to pay for it. The federal government is and has been acting beyond their constitutional authority. Currently states Texas, Utah and Montana (more coming) are setting up court challenges to rein in the federal government's out of control illegal power grab. For those who quote any of the Founding Fathers, then certainly you must be aware that the U.S. Constitution clearly grants very little power to the Fed in favor of the majority of power going to the states. In this way, the individual is empowered to impact policy more effectively on the local and state level. When it comes to government run healthcare, or any government run enity, just look at the VA. While other countries in the world pursue big government controlling policies they have stagnated (also consider New Jersey and California on the state level when it comes to out of control social engineering and high taxes), while we have prospered under private enterprise. The current recession was not caused by the lack of government regulation, but too much over-regulation when banks were reguired to issue home loans to people who were uncreditworthy beginning in 1999. Seems we should be trying to fix social security and medicare (trillions in debt and out of control fraud), and get the market back up and running before we try a new entitlement process that will cause serious harm to our private health care system, even destroy it and leave us at the mercy of government bueaucrats deciding what medical procedures you may have done. Every government health care system on the planet has a rationing system that is getting worse as their resources continue to diminish.

Tim King: Bush started a war that should have never been waged and gave trillions to his rich friends, essentially at least. Now you have a President who wants to see all people have healthcare so they can live better, and he's trying to save what Bush devastated, and you call it a power grab? All I can say is that it's a hell of a good thing that your team is out. You lost, and America won and you don't like it; too bad.

[Return to Top]

Op Ed: Capitalism, Driven
By Profit Motive,
Threatens Healthcare

Quick Links

DINING

MUST SEE SALEM

AUCTIONS - APPRAISALS

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

ONLINE SHOPPING

Advertise with Salem-News