Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Point by Point Rebutttal to John Mackey

My original post was going to be a review of District 9. I've been forced to delay that for a more pressing issue. I was recently given the link to a letter about Health Care Reform by John Mackey, Founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market Inc. It makes, by my count, nine points against having a public option. I intend to highlight and dispute each.

1.Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs)

At first glance, High Deductible Insurance plans seem like a fair way to bring down health care costs. The insurance company only pays for large medical needs, if you were to be in a devastating accident of some sort. Also, in most plans, your contribution does not exceed $3000 per year. However, here lies the rub. You are left paying for your prescriptions the entire year, as well as any minor doctor visit. The only incentive this offers is for patients not to see their doctors nor take their medication when they are sick. Otherwise they're left holding the large bill. A high deductible health plan is beneficial to those who are young and healthy (with a dash of luck that you won't develop some "rare" chronic disorder, such as asthma) and those who are wealthy enough that they can pay for their own medications and don't want high premiums (or taxes). Most people spend much more money on an HDI than on a more traditional plan and suggesting that health care's answer lies in a blind cost cutting maneuver by insurance companies is irresponsible and unwise.

2. Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.

Mr. Mackey's sole reasoning for this is that it is unfair for people who buy their own health insurance rather than get it through their employers have to pay a higher tax on their insurance. I disagree.

People who buy their own health insurance are often in a much higher tax bracket, for those are the people who can afford their own medication in exchange for low premiums. This country is not, nor has not been in nearly 90 years, a capitalist economy. It is a social capitalist economy. That means societal safety nets, such as medicaid, which are funded largely by tax money of the top 1%. It makes sense to not tax people who get their health insurance through their employer. These are the people who need expendable cash if the economy is going to recover. But to the top 1% who feel they are being unfairly taken advantage of because of their hard work: Cry me a river.

Do you really, honestly believe that a CEO of a multi billion dollar corporation has worked any harder in his life than a janitor? Or had any more of an impact on society than a teacher? Wealth does not measure your importance, superiority, or penis. It measures how well you played the game combined with how lucky you got combined with how lucky you were to begin with. It's more or less a craps shoot. So if you win that lottery of priviledge and opportunity and hard work, you should really be more gracious with your good fortune, rather than clutching it to your heart with a miser's grasp.

3. Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines.

A recent study has shown that the concept of freeing up trade between states for health insurance would result in millions losing coverage due to skyrocketed premiums. In essence, what would occur is the health insurance companies in the states with the least regulations would steamroll all competition in states that have stricter regulations. With no real competition, the strongest remaining insurance companies would have the power to insure only the healthy and have the ability to drop you as soon as you get sick.

When will we wake up and remember that Enron, Bernie Madoff, and every other financial clusterfuck was due to the loosening of financial regulations over the past decade and a half? The same people who accuse the government of instituting "death panels" will blow a shit gasket if we asked to look into all of their numbers. I'm sorry to Adam Smith, Ron Paul, and even Ayn Rand, but the answer to health care reform is NOT less government. Someone needs to watch out for the rest of us.

4.
Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover

Seriously?

5.
Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

From what I understand, the malpractice issue is a talking point that is overblown and oversimplified when the insurance landscape is on the verge of being forced to change. Either way, here is a piece by William M. Sage (who possesses both an M.D and a J.D.) that may shed more light on it than Mr. Mackey's opinion that "these costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care."

6. Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost

I'm tired of the concept of treating health care like any other good or service. It's not. You can't treat your body like your car and say one day, "hell, time to scrap it." Just like you can't say, "I'll get the liver done now, but I have to wait on the cholesterol medication." Health care is intrinsically more urgent than the market can dictate. Additionally, what do you cut out when you itemize your doctor's bill? I don't know about Mr. Mackey, but if the doctor says I need a test, I take undergo the test. If the doctor says I need a medication to get better, I take that medication. I do this because I hardly feel I have the medical experience required to determine whether or not I need anti biotics. For those out their who look at the price once the bill is sent, the shock is not over what tests they underwent or what medicines they took. They were there, they know what they did. It is over the COST of each individual treatment that they thought they were covered for.

7.
Enact Medicare reform."We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy"

I completely agee with Mr. Mackey on this point. However, arguing against higher taxes on the rich and then saying that Medicare is going bankrupt is somewhat like standing next to a big pile of money, looking me right in the eye, and saying, "this pile of money keeps going down, we better just get rid of it," as your hands shove fistfulls of dollars in your pockets as quickly as they can.

8.
Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program.

This is Mr. Mackey's solution. "Lift taxes so that the top 1% can have more money and they will.... give it to charity." I would like to take this moment to address those who give hundreds of thousands to charities to help themselves sleep at night: you can not purchase any pardons for your sins and the only thing that can truly save you is to be honest with yourself. I'd also like to point out that people's health insurance should not depend on what the rich feel like they'll throw in for posterity's sake.

9.
"Health Care is not a Right in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution"

Once again, Mr. Mackey is absolutely correct. What he leaves out is that the Declaration of Independence refers only to white landowning men and the Constitution originally counted blacks as three fifths of a person. The Constitution can be changed. In fact it has been 27 times. Maybe it IS time for a 28th and it does not look like it will be an amendment against gay marriage any more. Why not do something wacky and add the right to health care or the right from poverty?

I would like to at this point address any remaining arguments pre-emptively:

1. How are insurance companies supposed to compete with a government program?

Two examples come to mind: The Post Office and public schools. Both have run for a long time and both have significant private competitors. People, especially those at state universities, should realize this.

2. How can we cover 55 million people while we face staggering national deficit?

Forget that the current health care scenario in this country is more expensive than any other industrialized nation. The government's wasteful spending is not in health care initiatives. It's in things like the WAR ON DRUGS and WAR ON TERROR.

3. What about "ADOLF" Obama's DEATH PANELS and NAZI AGENDA???

Grow Up.

For the record, I don't actually believe we need an amendment that ensures a right to health care. It's far too broad a statement, and to make it an amendment would undoubtedly result in more confusion. However, I think we need to agree as a nation that health care needs to be more fair than it has been. And more fair than Mr. Mackey's suggestions.



7 comments:

  1. "Do you really, honestly believe that a CEO of a multi billion dollar corporation has worked any harder in his life than a janitor? Or had any more of an impact on society than a teacher? Wealth does not measure your importance, superiority, or penis. It measures how well you played the game combined with how lucky you got combined with how lucky you were to begin with. It's more or less a craps shoot. So if you win that lottery of priviledge and opportunity and hard work, you should really be more gracious with your good fortune, rather than clutching it to your heart with a miser's grasp."

    This is dangerous to just pass off that CEO hardly has worked to be where he is. No doubt that some have gotten there because they were next in line, or because they were part of the family, had special ties, but a lot of CEOs worked damn hard to be where they are. Yet you pass this off as though it's nothing.

    Working to your mind's full extent and making very worthwhile contributions to society are amazing. You are really implying a lack of appreciation for everything we have. I don't mean any offense by this, but I think it's quite easy to not appreciate inventions or technologies when you're not involved in them. But honestly, what google has done, and is continuing to do amazes me. They have an amazing team of software developers on their side, and more importantly, the founders are true geniuses. But you pass this off as meh! hard work!

    You then go onto :

    "I completely agee with Mr. Mackey on this point. However, arguing against higher taxes on the rich and then saying that Medicare is going bankrupt is somewhat like standing next to a big pile of money, looking me right in the eye, and saying, "this pile of money keeps going down, we better just get rid of it," as your hands shove fistfulls of dollars in your pockets as quickly as they can."

    You CANNOT always use the rich as a crutch, and they shouldn't even be exploited that way! It's completely the other way around!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I just mentioned the hard work of many CEOs, and those who have earned that money. But in your eyes, their pile of cash is the government's pile of cash, and you say the CEOs are stuffing their OWN money into their pockets. Isn't it the government who is saying, "We need more of that, give us more, we need more" and reaching into THEIR pockets. This is not an effective government! That is the RICH's money! I have said this in another forum:
    Starting your own company - let alone a successful one - is difficult, but its fruits are plentiful. Working for a successful business is a bit easier, but working hard to move up similarly has ripe rewards, whereas say, becoming a janitor is one of the easiest, but has the lowest rewards. It's not about "working hard" as it is working to your mind's full potential. Those who slack away in life, and do nothing in school (see: me in high school), have no gumption (luckily I have this), do not deserve a higher paying job by any means nor do they deserve to leech off the rich (too much).

    As in (too much) , I mean to agree with you in that any man who has decided to go/stay that route, and may be working to what he believes is his full mind's extent, deserves some help because I know, and you know, that they do work pretty hard.

    What I present is an individualist society where the rich earned everything they have, and it's up to them to give to charity with it or not. Honestly, you shouldn't paint them such a nasty picture. If Ayn Rand (as you mentioned) taught us anything, it's the rich are really the spearheads of a society in a state of technological improvement. This has shown to make the life easier for everyone, so they deserve it. But to give charity by the aim of a gun (government enforcing you to) is not charity any longer. Not to mention you insult the rich, but I'm purely on that path of trying to get rich and start my own company. My dreams don't involve my own self-indulgence but giving a lot of money to people because I can. Likewise, I think a lot of people are like this. The ones you have to watch out for are the ones who HADN'T worked hard to be where they are, and spend recklessly endlessly searching for some moral fulfillment in material gains.

    But where we both agree is that we want to give that lower bracket some breathing room because it's like, hey you work hard day to day, a public basic option is what we can do for you. Without having to always go to the rich, is to remove the bullshit in our government. With an effective government, I imagine we can cut taxes to ~10% out of our paychecks (instead of the 20 I see out of mine.. and I think most?) and still provide basic healthcare, after we remove the war on terror/drugs. Jesus Christ military eats up a ton of money. You're spot on about that.

    Oh and yea, we have to stay away from the constitution. If shit ever hit the fan, like bad, we can't have people saying it's our constitutional right to get healthcare if the government looks like it's dying already. I hear ya though.

    Good points though, I'm more open to healthcare now. I'll have to do some research.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Man, I'm never on google blogs anymore. Check out my poems! If you want to!

    Many people don't read those. They're corny, but I recently wrote the first one.. I like it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://nothingbuthype.blogspot.com/2008/08/cupids-love-poison.html

    ....

    Just saying.. that's the best. Ok I'm done!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I understand the surprise at my statement at a janitor working harder than a CEO. I do not feel that the rich are hoarding their money from the government as much as they are from society. I do not mean small business owners nor necessarily those in the $250,000-1 million range. It is clear and evident that America depends on competition as well as ambitious individuals. My father and landlord both run their own business and my mother works for a man who does the same. My issue is with the top .5% who posses 95% of the wealth. This kind of imbalance does not come from any kind of superiority or harder work ethic. It's a result of shady dealings and greed of un imaginable extremes. However, Ron Paul is good at making Americans believe that I want to take money from them when they're trying to make money. I'm doing the same thing. I'm just not sold that a man making 35 million a year is really worth that much more than a physicist or a doctor (or a librarian). And yet he makes 70 times the most of the other professions.

    ReplyDelete
  6. the guy who thinks "the rich are really the spearheads of a society in a state of technological improvement" wants me to read his doggerel love poems?

    i hope everyone who isnt rich does us the favor of dying their expensive deaths, because the spearheads have important things to do. like run companies which depend on ......their......labor......... and..their......... consumption......fuck.

    i know. i should be more constructive.

    maybe i'll build a dining room table to talk to.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I didn't get a notification for this!

    Oh ok, good point about the top .5. Then we're in agreement. I thought your rich thing was pointed at the 250-1mil as well.

    Who's rsam? In a more perfect society, rather than one that has these admitted shady deals going on, someone who uses their mind to build an empire, even one that pays for a ridiculous salary of 35 mil/year, can do what he wishes with his money because he's doing SOMETHING for society.

    I don't know who the spearheads are if not the rich. No shit they rely on their labor, that's why they're the spearHEADS and not the entire spear. They got it moving and like it or not, they now own the company. They're indebted to their employees and as such, reward them with their pay checks. It doesn't get much simpler from that. When's the last time you tried starting a company? All I'm saying is that the rich don't deserve to get shitted on as much as they do. Mike is on the same page as me.

    Thanks for the jackass comment though; says a lot about your character. I never once implied them of any value, nor held a gun to your head to read them.

    ReplyDelete