Hyperbole As News
September 18, 2009
|
Posted by Michael S. Langston
First – a disclaimer – I have a feeling that some of you who might agree with me normally, might feel uncomfortable about this discussion. However, if we truly want an open and honest debate, tough questions will need to be asked and answered.
According to a recent Harvard Medical School study via Rueters:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year — one every 12 minutes — in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday.
“We’re losing more Americans every day because of inaction … than drunk driving and homicide combined,” Dr. David Himmelstein, a co-author of the study and an associate professor of medicine at Harvard, said in an interview with Reuters.
To begin, we should take note of the wording itself as the 45K number is logically very tough to substantiate. The report itself states these people died “in large part” due to lack of insurance, noting in the wording the difficulty of the definition. Not only would you need to find people who might have lived with insurance, but I think you should also remove those people who could afford it but chose not to (usually younger professionals with a belief that they don’t need it).
Having said that, even if we assume the 45K number is accurate, it is true that it’s higher than both homicide and drunk driving rates combined at around about 30K deaths a year.
Using the 45K & the “ideal” $200 billion a year (CBO reports government health care spending with the new bill will be 1 trillion in new spending over the next ten years), we would be spending about 4.5 million for each life saved. This assumes that the government projections are correct, which we know history shows us it’s likely to cost much, much more. & it assumes that giving them insurance would truly save lives.
The difference in the analogy therefore is that no one in congress is currently setting up a bill where will spend an additional 4.5 million dollars per homicide & drunk driving deaths in order to save those lives.
I recognize for some, cost/benefit analysis is by definition wrong since human life is sacred, but we have to recognize that spending 4.5 million on say cancer or heart disease research is likely to save many, many more lives than spending it on the current health care plan.
Globally, spending this much money on portable water, malaria drugs, childhood vaccinations, and other fairly cheap solutions would save literally tens of millions of people each year.
I know – cold-blooded, heartless, etc – but given my current income level, I wouldn’t even force my own family to come up with 4.5 million to save me, much less think it’s my neighbor’s responsibility to pony up part of the cash through the force of law to do so.
Categories: Critical Thinking, Economics, Legislation, Political Philosophy, Politics
| 
Tags: CBO, Cost/Benefit Analysis, Critical Thinking, Economics, False Analogy, Government Abuses, Government Services, harvard, Health Care Reform, insurance, Legislation, Logical Fallacy, Political Philosophy, Politics, Politics of Fear, Wasteful Spending
|
No Comments
