Over there

I think the health care reform debate, if one can even call it that, ought to be grounded in reality.  One aspect of reality relevant to the debate regards what is empirically possible.  People seem to take it, for instance, that covering more people and having better outcomes necessarily entails either spending a lot more or getting a lot less.  Other countries succeed at it, so perhaps we should at least patiently and honestly discuss what they do.  Just a thought.

4 thoughts on “Over there”

  1. Channeling Rodney King?
    Opposition parties use whatever is most convenient to mobilize their grassroots. Iraq for Bush, health care for Obama (so far). Ultimately, it’s just about power, right? The power to get elected, to drive viewers to a political television network, readers to political books, etc. The extremists on both sides may be genuinely concerned for people, but this is not what drives sales/elections. Partisan passions do. Therefore the moderates are rarely/never heard and the discussion is dominated by the extremes.

  2. Hm. Nice one Brian, but I think many of the arguments advanced against health care reform involve claims about empirical possibility that are demonstrably false. Perhaps someone ought to point that out.

  3. Absolutely, but since when did truth factor into political discourse? It would be wonderful if it did. Relative moderates on both sides seem to do a fair job of pointing out the false claims of the other side, but this largely drowned out in the noise made by the extremists of the opposition party, whose goal is simply to make enough noise to distract and confuse and wrest away power.

    But maybe blogs such as this can make a difference by providing a reasoned voice.

Comments are closed.