Tuesday, May 4, 2010
How Much Did You Earn Today
I volunteered today for my candidate of choice. Apparently the labor unions decided it was appropriate (although probably illegal) to pay their apprentice students to campaign on behalf of the D candidates. If a candidate is willing to violate federal law to get a NOMINATION what will he or she do if elected?
Friday, October 30, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Capitalism and Compassion
read an article yesterday in Popular Mechanics. Actually, it was an interview with Dean Kamen. In case you do not know, Dean Kamen is an inventor. He invented a portable infusion pump so that patients didn't have to stay in the hospital at the age of 20. He went on to invent a home dialysis machine, a wheelchair that goes up stairs, a robotic prosthetic and, most recently, The Slingshot portable water purification system. (read the full interview here: http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4333141.html)
Nothing frames the debate about health care more simply than Kamen's comments. He calls the entire debate "misguided." Kamen points out that at one time we were faced with the likely prospect of millions of people suffering the debilitating symptoms of polio. A "compassionate" government may have allocated billions of dollars in funds to help these people and alleviate their suffering. This would have involved round the clock medical care for people who were on iron lungs (remember those contraptions?). The United States Government encouraged capitalists to find solutions. Ultimately, the cost was about $2.00 per person to vaccinate nearly the entire population of the US. Did some people suffer and die while waiting for this vaccine? Of course they did.
Kamen points out that about 30% of our federal health care budget goes to treat diabetes and related complications. Of course we have to ensure that diabetes patients get proper care. More important, however, is encouraging the next generation of scientists to discover ways to prevent and cure diabetes. Government run health care simply will not do that.
Those who support socialized medicine will say that we can do both. I think history will show that is not possible. When the government gets involved innovation and competition are stifled. Political decisions are made and resources are diverted to treatment rather than cure. It is human nature. If I am hurting, I would rather have a pain pill right now than a surgery in 5 years. But if I am a researcher that wants to make an impact on the world and make a fortune doing it, there has to be a system of rewards in place to encourage that. In theory, the fame should be enough reward. Helping your fellow man is a great accomplishment and has motivated many individuals to do great things. The reality is that research is extremely expensive. It takes all of the resources of government, industry and education together to make many of these advances. Taking private capital out of the situation may mean that millions of patients will have to suffer with diabetes for 10 or 20 years longer.
Nothing frames the debate about health care more simply than Kamen's comments. He calls the entire debate "misguided." Kamen points out that at one time we were faced with the likely prospect of millions of people suffering the debilitating symptoms of polio. A "compassionate" government may have allocated billions of dollars in funds to help these people and alleviate their suffering. This would have involved round the clock medical care for people who were on iron lungs (remember those contraptions?). The United States Government encouraged capitalists to find solutions. Ultimately, the cost was about $2.00 per person to vaccinate nearly the entire population of the US. Did some people suffer and die while waiting for this vaccine? Of course they did.
Kamen points out that about 30% of our federal health care budget goes to treat diabetes and related complications. Of course we have to ensure that diabetes patients get proper care. More important, however, is encouraging the next generation of scientists to discover ways to prevent and cure diabetes. Government run health care simply will not do that.
Those who support socialized medicine will say that we can do both. I think history will show that is not possible. When the government gets involved innovation and competition are stifled. Political decisions are made and resources are diverted to treatment rather than cure. It is human nature. If I am hurting, I would rather have a pain pill right now than a surgery in 5 years. But if I am a researcher that wants to make an impact on the world and make a fortune doing it, there has to be a system of rewards in place to encourage that. In theory, the fame should be enough reward. Helping your fellow man is a great accomplishment and has motivated many individuals to do great things. The reality is that research is extremely expensive. It takes all of the resources of government, industry and education together to make many of these advances. Taking private capital out of the situation may mean that millions of patients will have to suffer with diabetes for 10 or 20 years longer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)