Filed By Bil Browning | October 07, 2009 7:00 AM | comments
Filed in: You Gotta See This
Tags: health care, health reform, Red State Update
If everyone who didn't have healthcare died, everyone would have health care. So why not kill the sick to save health care?
We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.
The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.
There are a number of science fiction stories (although I can't name any off the top of my head) that depict alternate societies where all health care is free. But there is one catch: to be eligible for your first major treatment, you must submit to sterilization. Thus the citizens who have genes that display less than perfect health tend to not reproduce as much, producing a human gene pool that tends to evolve toward stronger and stronger natural health. And by employing nature to do the heavy lifting, this desirable goal is achieved very cost effectively.
Modern civilization has rejected such schemes of social Darwinism --- even though, from a purely scientific standpoint, some have their merits. Instead, we are choosing to study the voluminous genome, octet by octet, partially motivated by the idea that someday we might be able to deliberately tweek it, via gene therapy or other mechanisms, to discourage or eliminate "bad genes". But this approach, too, in addition to being very slow and very expensive, is fraught with dangers.
The problem with social Darwinism is finding an approach that values the individual as much as it values the group. It is not the purpose of nature to value the individual. It is one of the purposes of civilization to do that.
This reminds me of an idea I floated a couple of years ago among some Right acquaintances. There has been a long bout of Bud-fueled palaver about the problem of homelessness. More specifically, it was focused on homeless PEOPLE. They clutter up the place, ya know. I suggested that the Gummint ought to turn a de facto situation into a de jure one by gathering all the homeless people, giving them whatever medical treatment was needed to make them at least acceptably non-contagious, dressing them from Old Navy discards, then putting them into supervised (and profit making) brothels. They would be off the streets, out of sight, and gainfully employed. Thus, some social benefits would come from the existing situation where we "f**ck the poor".